Whether the credit payment for the vehicle purchased by a fishery cooperative for a contact with poor visitors is part of the incidental expenses necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose of the cooperative.

If the purchase price of a vehicle on credit by a fisheries cooperative for an empty village was directly related to the cooperative's implementation of its intended business at that time, it shall be deemed as part of the incidental expenses necessary for the implementation of its intended business rather than any independent act of the cooperative. Therefore, the cooperative is obligated to pay the price.

Article 34 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Black and Fishing Cooperatives

Gwangju High Court Decision 72Na253 delivered on November 23, 1973

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below acknowledged that the non-party, who was the head of the defendant association on the basis of macroficial evidence, purchased on credit equivalent to 374,860 won in the name of the head of the association from January 1, 1968 to the end of 1970, in the name of the general meeting of the defendant association and the officer meeting of the defendant association from 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 20 20 20 200 20 20 20 20 20 202 20 200 200 20 200 200 200 200 200 200 202 200 200 200 200

However, if the credit payment for the instant vehicle was directly related to the implementation of the objective business at that time by the Defendant Union as acknowledged by the lower court, it should be deemed that it was part of the incidental expenses necessary for the implementation of the objective business rather than the separate act of the Defendant Union. Thus, the lower court’s judgment that the credit payment was out of the scope of the business objective of the Defendant Union is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment, and therefore, the Plaintiff’s appeal disputing this point is justified.

Therefore, the original judgment is reversed and remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)