logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.12.16 2015가단13838
투자금반환등 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant B from August 12, 2015 to Defendant C, and Defendant C from August 2, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 5, 2012, the Plaintiff made an investment of KRW 100 million to the Defendant B, and Defendant C signed an investment agreement with the effect that, within five months from the date of construction completion, the Plaintiff would pay to the Plaintiff the investment principal and the dividend amount of KRW 75 million, within five months from the date of construction completion, within five months from the date of construction commencement (hereinafter “instant investment agreement”). Defendant C signed and sealed the instant investment agreement on the “sureties” column of the instant investment agreement.

B. On July 5, 2012, the Plaintiff paid all of the investment principal KRW 100 million to Defendant B on the day of the instant investment agreement.

C. Around July 15, 2012, the Plaintiff and Defendant C: (a) written loan instrument stating that “the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant C, and the amount borrowed, KRW 50,000,00,000,000,000,000 under the said Other canal Investment Agreement, shall be determined as KRW 1/2 (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”); and (b) the Plaintiff shall make an investment of KRW 50,000 in the Plaintiff’s name, and pay KRW 37,50,000,000,000,000 out of the total income of KRW 75,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. The period for profit distribution shall be 50% even in cases where a profit is written.” (hereinafter “each of the instant instruments”) under the Investment Convention, as of July 5, 2012, respectively, was written as the date of the preparation of the instant investment agreement.

On the other hand, Defendant B, a joint implementation of the construction project for the new construction of the Reasons CCC and other canal ices, has been commenced since then, the construction has not been completed until now due to disputes with owners of the relevant land, differences among investors, etc.

E. Afterwards, the Plaintiff sought the return of the loan against the Defendant based on the instant loan certificate, and the Defendant became final and conclusive.

arrow