(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.04.04 2013노3

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.04.04 2013노3

도시및주거환경정비법위반

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of punishment shall be suspended against the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The delegation contract of each lawsuit as stated in the judgment below is within the scope of the association's budget.

However, on February 5, 2005, the General Assembly of Management and Disposal Plans adopted a resolution on February 5, 2005 at the general meeting of the management and disposal plans, and established a comprehensive budget exceeding one fiscal year until the end of the reconstruction project. The association of this case set the cost of lawsuit at KRW 3 billion by considering the cost of each of the instant contracts as much as the cost of each of the instant contracts and the cost of each of the instant contracts did not exceed KRW 2.3 billion. Thus, the costs of each of the instant contracts are included within the items and scope prescribed by the budget of the instant association, inasmuch as the instant association’s total cost of each of the contracts did not exceed KRW 2.3 billion, considering the cost of each of the instant lawsuits including the instant contracts.

(2) Each of the instant contracts does not constitute a contract that imposes a burden on a partner.

Since the retainers or contingent fees under each of the contracts of this case are borne by GS Construction, which is a contractor, pursuant to the conclusive shares system, the above contract does not constitute a contract that will become a partner's burden, and as long as the project cost of the association is set in the management and disposal plan and the general meeting passes a resolution, it does not constitute a contract that will become a new burden

In particular, in the case of a contract for delegation of a lawsuit under paragraph (1) of the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, since the case was won in the lawsuit, the association of this case is beneficial to the association of this case, and the retainer of a contract for delegation of a lawsuit under paragraph (2) of the facts stated in the judgment of the court below belongs to the budget item and scope of the association of this case, and the contingent fee is paid at a certain ratio of the winning fee on the condition of winning, so the winning fee shall not be disbursed from

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.03.21 2012노4321

-서울서부지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노1518

-서울북부지방법원 2018.06.01 2017노1598

-부산지방법원 2013.12.06 2013노3245

-수원지방법원 2013.02.07 2012노2757