logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.16 2016나72381
부당이득금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court which cited the judgment of the court of first instance is based on the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance.

In addition to the following cases, a claim is used as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, and such claim is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Supplementary Use】

B. Determination 1) If the objective meaning of the language and text is clear in cases where a contractual party prepares a written contract as a disposal document, barring any special circumstance, the existence and content of the expression should be recognized, barring any special circumstance. In particular, in cases where an interpretation differently from the objective meaning of the language and text causes a serious impact on the legal relationship between the parties, the content of the language and text should be more strictly interpreted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da21621, Nov. 27, 2014). Meanwhile, the key substance of an investment agreement separate from a monetary lending is uncertainty of the occurrence of profit. The distinction between a loan and an investment should be made by taking into account the existence of the principal, the background and motive of the payment, the fixedness of the principal, the awareness and intent of the parties, etc.

The above evidence and evidence in Gap evidence No. 8 are as follows, i.e., (i) if the plaintiff did not properly proceed with the sales agency business due to the lack of substantial financial resources at the time of the preparation of the investment agreement, the defendant did not recover KRW 100 million, and the plaintiff himself was aware of the cost and the defendant.

arrow