logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.03.30 2016나2078791
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The plaintiff in the judgment of this court is the purport of the above claim in the first instance court.

b. Claim(s) against the part of this paragraph.

As to the part of paragraph (1), “the Defendant shall deliver each of the equipment listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff,” following the judgment.

Since an appeal was filed only for the part of the claim, the subject of the trial at the court of first instance is the subject of the claim.

It is part of paragraph.

2. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of developing, manufacturing, and selling golf-related software, which is engaged in the business of developing, manufacturing, and selling screen golf systems using a camera, etc.

The defendant is a company whose purpose is transportation-related service business, freight forwarding business, etc.

B. On April 9, 2014, shareholders E holding 253,133 shares issued by the Plaintiff as the representative director and the Plaintiff concluded a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant on April 9, 2014 that “Defendant shall acquire 9,360 shares of the Plaintiff’s issued shares in KRW 20,000 per share and invest 2,40,00 won per share issued by the Plaintiff in the manner of acquiring 2,50,00 won per share of new shares issued by the Plaintiff” (hereinafter “instant shareholder”).

C. Around August 2014, the Defendant purchased at 1,750,000 won per 1,750,000 Kamerz Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Cloz”) and “the Defendant entered into a contract for supply of Kamerz (hereinafter “the instant contract”).

E The employees of the Plaintiff, including E, demanded the correction or supplementation of the products in the course of the Kamerasa test of Croats, and prepared and provided the packaging design and marks to Croats.

E on December 24, 2014, the Defendant and E (the Plaintiff indicated as the founder of the Si) are the Plaintiff owned by the Defendant from the Defendant.

arrow