beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found in full view of the respective entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including each branch number in the case of those with a serial number) and the whole purport of the pleadings:
Defendant E, on February 10, 200, was appointed as the representative director of Defendant F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant F”), and resigned on January 9, 2003. Defendant E, who was appointed as a director on May 6, 2004, retired on January 9, 2006.
B. The net G remitted each of the KRW 100 million to Defendant F on March 2, 2005, and KRW 92 million to Defendant E on May 16, 2005.
C. The deceased G died on October 23, 2008, and the Plaintiff A, as his spouse, succeeded to the respective network G as their children.
2. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion of the plaintiffs: (a) around May 16, 2005, the network G entered into a partnership agreement with the defendant E or the defendant F to jointly invest in the aquaculture located in Haan-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter "the farm of this case"); and (b) the above partnership invested KRW 192 million in the above partnership; (c) as the network G was deceased and withdrawn from the above partnership, the defendant E or the defendant F, a partner, has a duty to settle the above partnership's shares in accordance with Article 717 of the Civil Code; (d) at the time of the withdrawal of the network G, the above partnership's property does not change with the net G at the time of investment of KRW 192 million; and (e) the association's share subject to settlement should be KRW 169,200,000,000,0000,000 won x KRW 962,62,064,000,00 each of the shares (i).
3. Defendant E’s judgment on the main defense of Defendant E did not have entered into any association agreement with the deceased G, and thus, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful against a non-qualified person. As such, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is examined and requested for performance.