(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2020.06.03 2018가단13822

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2020.06.03 2018가단13822

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, in fact, lent KRW 20 million to Nonparty C and KRW 90 million to Nonparty D. On May 16, 2018, the Defendant: (a) made and provided to the Plaintiff a letter of commitment with the following content (hereinafter “instant letter of commitment”); and (b) made and provided the second agreement with respect to D’s obligations (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

B, a substitute performance, is undertaking to A for the obligations of the debtor C and D as follows:

- The maturity date for repayment of some of C’s 200 million Won obligations

6. By 10.10,00 won shall be paid by proxy.

- With respect to 40 million won, which has been put in the value of the oil set forth in subparagraph 1 of D's 90,000 won, the container original ELL scheduled to be placed on a monthly basis is repaid.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. With respect to the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of KRW 40 million against the Defendant under the instant agreement, the Defendant asserted that the instant agreement was established on the condition that the container was loaded and the cargo was issued. However, since the container was not loaded and the cargo was not issued, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

B. According to the above facts, the instant agreement constitutes a condition precedent which creates the Defendant’s obligations on the condition that container shipments and the issuance of rupture securities accordingly, and constitutes a condition precedent which creates the Defendant’s obligations.

Therefore, unless the condition is fulfilled, the plaintiff cannot request the defendant to perform the performance under the agreement of this case, and there is no evidence to prove that the above condition has been fulfilled.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2019.12.18 2018가단17291

-부산지방법원 2015.10.30 2015노245

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.17 2014가단42668

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.01.09 2016가합50934

-서울남부지방법원 2016.07.14 2015가단227400