logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2019.06.20 2019나10147
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance except where the court added the judgment as to the allegations added by the plaintiffs in this court. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence

2. Parts 8 18 and 19 of the 8th letter "I, J Co., Ltd." shall be applied to "P, I and J Co., Ltd."

Part III (Expression of Intention) “A” and “B” and an investment company involved in the agreement and project shall be made in writing in accordance with Part 11, and any expression of intent related to the agreement and the project shall be made in writing, and any expression of intent not made in writing between the above parties shall be added.

3. Additional determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiffs’ assertion 1 regarding the grounds for termination under Article 16(1)2 and 4 of the instant Convention is as follows: ① the Defendant consented to the composition of investors and equity shares of Plaintiff B on October 27, 2015. ② Article 5(3) of the instant Convention ought to be interpreted to mean that the Defendant shall consent to the change of investors, etc., barring any special circumstance. ③ Since the Defendant’s responsibility was required for the change of investors and equity shares, the termination of the instant agreement without the Defendant’s consent to the change of investors, etc. violates the duty of cooperation under Article 3 of the instant Convention. ④ Since October 28, 2015, the Defendant did not raise any question about the composition of the Plaintiff B’s investors and equity shares; and on November 6, 2017, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to exercise the right to terminate the instant agreement without exercising the right for termination for a period of two years, and the Plaintiff A did not exercise the right to terminate the agreement.

arrow