logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.08 2018가단5002458
약정금
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 4,256,211 as well as annual 5% from September 21, 2017 to November 8, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff, a law firm, agreed to receive 20% of the winning amount as a successful fee from the Defendants on the civil litigation case filed against the Defendants other than the Defendants at Daejeon District Court Decision 2016Gahap105125, which was filed on August 25, 2016 (hereinafter “the case of a prior suit”), with the Defendants at the commencement fee of KRW 11 million (including additional tax).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant contingent fee arrangement”). B.

The Defendants shared Defendant B 3/10 and Defendant C 7/10 shares in the shares of Defendant B’s 3/10 and Defendant C’s 7/10. However, the instant real estate was located within the project site of the housing reconstruction project promoted by the Nonparty Cooperative.

C. In the above suit, the non-party union sought for the transfer registration and delivery of ownership of the instant real estate owned by the Defendants, etc. on the ground that the sales contract was concluded according to the market price with respect to the instant real estate, etc. located in the business site due to the exercise of the right to demand sale by the association under Article 39 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement

Although the non-party partnership filed a claim for simple performance at the stage of filing the suit in the preceding suit, in the later course, the result of the market price appraisal of the real estate subject to sale requested by the non-party partnership was to have changed the claim to repay the purchase price with the subsequent purchase price claim, which was the same as the defendants who accepted the case by the plaintiff as well as all other parties who did not accept the case.

E. In the above suit, the court of the court in accordance with the amended purport of the non-party union’s claim, “Defendant B, 625,583,829 won, and Defendant C, 959,695,601 won from the non-party union.

arrow