logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2014.03.18 2013가단6035
투자금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant is a person engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling functional health foods under the name of “C.” 2) around January 2013, Nonparty D, the president of the above C's racing branch, as the Plaintiff, recommended the Plaintiff to invest in the business conducted by the Defendant at any time on January 21, 2013, 350 won (30,000 won per annum (300,000 won) excluding holiday holidays. When investing in the business conducted by the Defendant, the Plaintiff invested 10,000 won (30,000 won) in the business conducted by the Defendant.

3) However, the Defendant did not pay KRW 26,571,00 of the principal and interest on investment by failing to pay the promised profits or paying at will a adjusted return rate, and discontinued business from July 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the principal and interest on investment that was not recovered to the Plaintiff as well as damages for delay.

B. The defendant himself only lent his name and does not actually operate the "C".

2. Generally, “investment” is carried out under the risk of not guaranteeing the investment principal or profit-making at the cost of expectation that it is possible to obtain high-profit profits, unlike “loan”. Therefore, barring special circumstances, such as where the other party did not intend or have ability to operate a business, and where the other party is unable to pay the investment principal or profit-making due to the occurrence of loss from the business to which the investment was made by deceiving the investment amount, barring special circumstances, such as where the other party could not make it difficult for the investor to seek payment of the investment principal or profit-making.

In the instant case, unlike the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant is the actual operator of “C”.

arrow