logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.05.04 2017나211932
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the court of first instance emphasizes or adds the following “2. Additional Judgment” is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The evidence No. 1 is added to the second written judgment of the court of first instance [based grounds for recognition].

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) according to Article 4(1) and (2) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, the agreement for a partnership related to the instant land is null and void; (b) the instant partner is the heir of the Plaintiff, C, and C, and the Defendant and C, the wife of the network D, are liquidated simultaneously with the conclusion of the sales contract for the instant land including the Plaintiff’s share; and (c) the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the amount claimed as unjust enrichment out of the purchase price

B. Determination 1) The invalidation under Article 4(1) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name is “title trust agreement” and the said Act does not become null and void. 2) In the event of an objective circumstance that it is deemed that it is extremely difficult to achieve the objectives of the association due to the aggravation of the status of the association or the aggravation of its business operation due to changes in the circumstances of the economic community, or where it is impossible to expect the smooth operation of the association due to the destruction of trust relationship due to the destruction of trust relationship between the parties to the association, a partner may claim dissolution of the association.

However, if it cannot be deemed that there was the consent of the other members in disposing of the co-owned share in the name of the manager with respect to the building acquired under the contract for the same business, the executor of the business of the partnership sells the co-owned share of the above building to the third party and proceeds from the sale.

arrow