beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance, including the primary claims added at the trial, shall be modified as follows:
The defendant.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the entry in this part of the underlying facts are as follows, except where the “judgment” of the first instance court No. 5 is deemed to be “adjudication”, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, thereby citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. The parties' assertion
A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a partnership agreement with the Plaintiff to jointly carry out the instant brand planning service and divide the profits therefrom. The Defendant, as the service cost for the brand planning service of this case, received a total of 2.7 million Chinese companies in China, and paid the proposal of 535,00 Chinese currency at related expenses, and seems to be a clerical error in the proposal of 2,164,000 Chinese currency at present (2,165,000).
A) The Plaintiff is keeping custody. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff received KRW 25 million from the Defendant based on the foregoing agreement. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s equity interest in the partnership was KRW 50:50,000, and the agreement was terminated upon the termination of the partnership agreement. As such, the Defendant is obligated to claim from the Defendant for settlement of accounts that the Plaintiff should pay to the Plaintiff KRW 182,260,00 (one half of the approximately 1/2,164,00 in China, which is kept by the Defendant, at the current exchange rate (180,000), KRW 194,760,000, and KRW 25 million in China, which is held by the Plaintiff, KRW 12,50,000,000 in total, KRW 182,50,000 in total, KRW 260,000 in total, KRW 46,500 in the brand service and KRW 1,500,000 in the subcontract work (=.2).
The Defendant paid only KRW 25 million out of the subcontract price to the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the subcontract price of KRW 119.5 million to the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 14.45 million - KRW 25 million).
B. The defendant is part of the brand planning service of this case to the plaintiff.