logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.02.16 2016나2020662
약정금 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeals and the claims added to the trial are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status H is the implementer of the K Commercial Building in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “instant commercial building”). The Defendant is the contractor of the instant commercial building, and the Plaintiffs are the partial sectional owners of the instant commercial building.

B. On July 207, 2007, the Defendant and the Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd.”) concluded a land trust agreement with the Defendant and the Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd.”) with respect to the construction of the instant commercial building, under which H, the executor of the construction and sale business of the instant commercial building, trusted the land located in the instant commercial building and the instant commercial building as trust property, and the Korea Asset Trust concluded a management-type land trust agreement with the content that the said trust property will be sold and managed under the terms

C. On November 6, 2007, H demanded the buyer of the instant commercial building to consent to the conversion of the fee to the sales store (the store in this case is jointly leased the store owned by the buyer to the lessee, and the sales management expenses, personnel expenses, advertising promotion expenses, various public charges, corporate tax, etc. are deducted from the profit accrued from the leased store, and H demanded the buyer to consent to the conversion of the fee to the sales store (the store in which the buyer pays the fee to the buyer according to the business profit rate calculated after deducting the sales management expenses, such as management expenses, personnel expenses, advertising expenses, various public charges, corporate tax, etc.). As above, H notified the buyer that the maximum return rate of 3% from the starting date of the business of each of the above stores should be paid (the payment security is insufficient when the profit rate of 3% is below the profit rate) for two years from the starting date of the business of the above stores, and some number of buyers of the instant commercial building in this case consented to the H proposal proposal.

The defendant who prepared a written agreement between H and the defendant shall be the defendant of H on February 24, 2009.

arrow