logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.02 2015가합68235
계약해지무효확인 및 방해행위금지
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company established mainly for the purpose of real estate development, consulting business, management business specialized in improvement projects, etc., and the defendant is a housing association established with the approval of the Housing Association Promotion Committee of Do-2 District Housing Association organized to promote a new apartment construction project (hereinafter "the project in this case") at Do-Eup and 220-12 Won in Masung-si in Masung-si.

(A service contract concluded between the promotion committee of the above regional housing association and the plaintiff is succeeded to the defendant after the establishment authorization of the housing association, and hereinafter referred to as the "defendant" without distinguishing the above promotion committee and the defendant.

On February 22, 2014, the Defendant entered into a service contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant service contract”) with the Plaintiff to select the Plaintiff as a service company for the implementation of the instant project, and entered into a service contract with the Plaintiff on February 22, 2014, with the content that the Plaintiff’s duty of providing administrative support for district unit planning, land sales contract, etc. and business-related authorization and permission, etc., for the first member recruitment (9 households), the service cost shall be KRW 6,783,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) for the first member recruitment (171 households), and the second member recruitment (171 households) by the resolution of the board of directors after consultation with the construction company.

In addition, the main contents of the instant service contract are as follows.

Article 2 (Purpose of Services)

2. The purpose of the plaintiff is to propose a regional housing project, which is not a general execution project, and the defendant has succeeded to a contract for the transfer or acquisition of the project execution right concluded between the plaintiff and the director of the partnership and designate the plaintiff as a service company performing the partnership affairs, thereby promoting the construction project of the regional

Article 3 (Service Period) The service period of the plaintiff, who is a service company for partnership execution designated by the defendant, shall be from the date of formation of the association establishment committee to the date of completion of approval for use or liquidation.

arrow