logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.09 2015가합560863
약정금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Plaintiff

The summary of the assertion was around 200, when Defendant C transferred to the police as a crime of gambling, the Plaintiff was trying to escape life and served as his driver. On November 2001, the Plaintiff purchased the golf membership in the name of the Plaintiff at the time of the racing, and on November 3, 2001, purchased the land in the name of the Plaintiff in the name of the Plaintiff, and on November 3, 2001, purchased the land in the name of Ulsanbuk-gu, Ulsan-gu, Incheon-gu, under the name of the Plaintiff. On November 3, 2001, the Plaintiff purchased the land in the name of 6,581 square meters (

In the above process, Defendant C promised to give KRW 2 billion to the Plaintiff several times, and the Plaintiff has been negligent in doing so with the Plaintiff’s business and home while neglecting the Plaintiff’s business. However, Defendant C did not comply with the above commitment.

On November 1, 2007, the Plaintiff decided to sell the forest land of this case to F in KRW 1.795 billion. On October 20, 2008, Defendant C found the Plaintiff and, with the knowledge of the above facts, issued one promissory note amounting to KRW 2 billion at face value to the Plaintiff upon completion of the sale of new G-built apartment under its own implementation. Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed Defendant C’s obligation to pay the above agreed amount with Defendant C with one person operated by Defendant C.

After three months thereafter, Defendant C completed the sale of the said newly constructed apartment. The Defendants jointly and severally are liable to pay the Plaintiff the above agreed amount of KRW 2 billion and the damages for delay.

Judgment

As to whether Defendant C agreed to pay KRW 2 billion to the Plaintiff upon completion of the sale of new G-built apartment, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the above assertion only by the descriptions of health room, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 18 (including paper numbers), and witness H’s testimony, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow