The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground that there was an error of law such as lack of reason or reason.

In a case where a dispute arises in an enterprise jointly operated by Gap, Eul, and Byung, and Byung has disbursed Byung's personnel expenses by employing two persons who are inevitable in the course of operating the above enterprise independently, and engaging in the work to which Eul and Eul are in charge, Byung's loss is equivalent to the amount of the lost profit which is not allocated due to a decrease in the profit equivalent to the personnel expenses, and not the total amount of the personnel expenses.

Article 394(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Defendant-Appellant Doctrine et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 86Na2780 delivered on April 21, 1987

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the plaintiffs and three parties jointly run the above-mentioned manufacturing business on June 10, 1976 and their profits are settled monthly at the end of 1977 and they jointly run the two manufacturing business, and there was a dispute over the distribution of profits between the plaintiffs and the defendant from the beginning of 1978 to the end of 1978, and the defendant has been in charge of the operation of the above business solely from June 1978. Thus, the court below determined that the defendant's liability for damages was 7,040,000 won in 1980 and 8,448,000 won in 19,40,000 won in 197, and that the defendant's liability for damages was 70,000 won in 19,30,400 won in total due to the defendant's failure to pay damages to the defendant for each of the above 19,301,301,408,7407.

However, according to the facts established by the court below, if the plaintiffs fulfilled their duties as a partner, the above company did not spend 15,760,000 won as personnel expenses between July 1, 1978 and April 30, 1982 and the above company did not spend 15,760,000 won for the same period. Accordingly, the defendant could have received a further distribution of KRW 5,253,333 out of the amount equivalent to 1/3 of the amount. Thus, the defendant could not receive a distribution of KRW 5,253,333 because the plaintiffs could not receive distribution due to the plaintiffs' failure to perform their duties as a partner.

Therefore, the defendant's sole operation of the Dong company shall be deemed to be the damage suffered by the defendant in full due to the failure of the plaintiffs to perform his/her duties as a partner. The plaintiffs are obligated to compensate the defendant for the amount of KRW 7,880,000 equivalent to one half of the above damages. The judgment of the court below which received the defendant's whole counterclaim for offset, shall be deemed to have committed an unlawful violation of the law due to the lack of reason or the contradiction of reason, and it is obvious that this affected the result of the judgment, and therefore, it constitutes the ground for reversal under Article 12 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and it is reasonable to point this out.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won