(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2014.12.18 2014가합11248

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2014.12.18 2014가합11248

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim is that the Plaintiff would, in accordance with the Defendant’s proposal, pay KRW 300 million to the Jeju-do head, by cultivating the ancient-gu heading mother species, from February 19, 2013 to July 31, 2013, the Plaintiff cultivated approximately KRW 150,00 to KRW 40,00,00 to KRW 80,00,00,000, as the Plaintiff supplied to the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay KRW 300,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

2. We examine whether an agreement on the cultivation of consignment claimed by the Plaintiff is established or not.

Witness

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in D’s testimony, it is recognized that the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 300 million in consideration of the Plaintiff’s testimony when the Defendant entrusted the Plaintiff with cultivating the high-gu horse seeds on the instant land, and supplied the mother species calculated therefrom, and received sales of KRW 1 billion after cultivating the seeds.

Furthermore, we examine whether the conditions stipulated in the agreement have been fulfilled or not.

Since the Plaintiff supplied 50 through 100 shares in a single-type 8,323 single-type 50 shares or 100 shares, it is difficult to deem that the estimated amount of supply was clearly differentiated to the extent that the maximum amount of supply was equal to two times in a minimum amount. Considering the circumstances, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion that the supply of a single-type 8,323 shares is not sufficient, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant failed to perform its duty to supply only a part of the mother cultivated by the Plaintiff before filing the lawsuit, and that the Defendant did not perform its duty to supply the remainder by arbitrarily disposing of the remaining portion of the mother supplied by the Plaintiff. As such, it is deemed that the Defendant failed to perform its duty to pay the remuneration set out in the agreement, on the basis of the payment of remuneration set forth in the agreement.

Therefore, the claim of this case on the premise that the defendant obtained a sale of KRW 1 billion is without merit.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2015.08.20 2015고단168

-광주지방법원 2015.11.20 2014가합4370

-광주지방법원 2015.07.15 2014나14302

-수원지방법원 2017.04.13 2016나61839

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.05.15 2018가단81123