logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2016.08.18 2016가단20254
기타(금전)
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 70,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 5, 2016 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 11, 2014, the Plaintiff, along with C and the Defendant, entered into a partnership business agreement (hereinafter “instant partnership business agreement”) with the Defendant to jointly carry out the “project for the construction of officetels located in Chungcheongnam-gun A” (hereinafter “instant new construction project”). On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 100,000 to the Defendant in accordance with the instant partnership business agreement.

B. Around October 2014, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to allow the use of KRW 100,000,000,000, which was invested by the Plaintiff in E Land Development Project (hereinafter “E”) within a short period of time, if it invests in the said land development project. The Plaintiff permitted the use of KRW 100,000,000, which was invested in the instant land development project and returned again pursuant to the instant trade agreement.

C. On November 7, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the instant trade agreement was reversed, and paid KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1, witness F, G's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The facts acknowledged prior to the determination as to the cause of the claim are as follows: (i) the instant trade agreement was interrupted since September 2014; and (ii) the Plaintiff appears to have filed the instant claim under the premise that the instant trade agreement was terminated by agreement between the parties; (ii) at the time of the instant trade agreement, C invests land in the Plaintiff, and the Defendant agreed to provide labor; and (iii) the instant trade agreement appears to have not been carried out separately after the agreement; and (iv) the instant trade agreement appears to have been carried out separately due to the instant trade agreement.

arrow