(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.09.26 2014가단853

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.09.26 2014가단853

투자금반환

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 80 million won and 20% interest per annum from December 21, 2013 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 20, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to jointly operate the gas station site and facilities located in Sejong City, but the Plaintiff paid KRW 400 million to the Defendant with the investment deposit. The Defendant agreed to return the investment deposit to the Plaintiff where the Defendant fails to obtain the bid price for the gas station site and facilities as a result of the bid.

(hereinafter “instant investment agreement”). (b)

On July 23, 2013, pursuant to the instant investment agreement, the Plaintiff delivered to the Defendant a part of KRW 120 million out of the investment amount.

C. However, on August 29, 2013, the Defendant failed to obtain a successful bid for the said gas station site and equipment, and on August 29, 2013, returned to the Plaintiff KRW 40 million out of the said KRW 120 million.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap 1 through 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 80 million (=120 million - 40 million) as the return of investment proceeds under the investment agreement of this case and damages for delay.

B. As to this, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant’s right to collateral security, which was established on the land and facilities of the above gas station, is not an investment money, but a consideration for transferring the said gas station site and facilities, and thus, the Defendant did not return the said right to the Plaintiff on the ground that it failed to obtain a successful bid for the aforementioned gas station site and facilities. However, in light of the fact that the investment agreement of this case does not separately calculate the value of the said right to collateral security and provide the transfer value thereof, the above KRW 120 million should be deemed as part of the investment amount as seen above, and the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2019.01.17 2017가합108965

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.13 2014가합48977

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.09.21 2017가단124165

-수원지방법원 2019.06.18 2018나83000

-서울고등법원 2017.06.14 2017나2010112