beta
Text
1. The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., the remainder of the agreed amount claim (hereinafter “instant agreed amount claim”) pursuant to the third agreement of this case payable by Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) is KRW 1,076,090,140 obtained by deducting the agreed amount amount of KRW 500,000 from the judgment of the previous lawsuit, which is recognized as the grounds for the judgment of the previous lawsuit. The remainder of the agreed amount to be paid by the Defendant B is KRW 76,00,000 after deducting the agreed amount of KRW 500,000 from the judgment of the previous lawsuit amount of KRW 1,276,090,140, which is recognized as the grounds for the previous lawsuit.
D. The Defendants asserted that the balance of the purchase price was KRW 664,645,00 from D, but the actual balance of the purchase price is only KRW 112,692,200.
Article 63,397,940 won (=1,076,090,140 won - 112,692,200 won) against Defendant B, and 663,397,940 won (=76,090,140 won - 112,692,200 won) against the remainder of the contract amount and the delayed amount. Thus, Defendant B seeks to pay the remainder of the contract amount and the delayed amount.
x. However, if the balance of the purchase price exceeds 112,692,200 won, the remainder remaining after offsetting the balance of the purchase price from the above agreed amount (1,076,090,140 won against Defendant A and 776,090,140 won against Defendant B) shall be paid.
B. The Defendants’ assertion (i.e., the third agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants is a partnership agreement, and thus, “the completion of loans and the conclusion of sales contracts under the instant business (hereinafter “instant subsidiary agreement”)” as an subsidiary to the payment of the agreed amount should be interpreted as a condition of suspension rather than an indefinite period, and as long as the said condition is not fulfilled, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants does not accrue.
Dor. Defendant 2