logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.17 2015가합553346
대여금 등
Text

1. Defendant A’s Housing Redevelopment Project Association, B, C, D, and E are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 1,059,232,003 and its related costs.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of housing construction business, etc., and the Defendant A Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter “Defendant A”) is a housing redevelopment project association with the approval of the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on February 21, 201 pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter “instant project”) in Bupyeong-gu T (10,925 square meters) in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City. The remaining Defendants are the members of the Defendant Union.

B. On September 1, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the construction work of the instant project with the Defendant Cooperatives (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Article 15(1) of the instant contract provides that “The Plaintiff shall lend business promotion expenses to the Defendant Union according to the terms and conditions of the lending separately determined.”

C. (1) The Plaintiff, from June 2, 201 to December 16, 2014, paid KRW 1,116,451,404 in total as operating expenses and project promotion expenses of the Defendant Union to the Defendant Union. On December 16, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,116,451,404, including KRW 1,116,451,404, which was paid between the Defendant Union and the Defendant Union, at zero percent (7,000,000) per annum; and the compensation for delay shall be paid at zero percent per annum (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).

Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Loan Agreement of this case provides that “When it is deemed difficult to perform the contractual obligations because the status and qualification of the Defendant union have been changed,” the grounds for loss of benefit arising therefrom. Meanwhile, at the time of entering into the Loan Agreement of this case, the Defendant B, as the president of the Defendant association, is the head of the Defendant association, and the Defendant C, D, and E, as the director of the Defendant association, as the joint and several surety (hereinafter “instant Loan Agreement”).

arrow