beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,853,711 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 20, 2016 to February 1, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 23, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concurrently run the “E” musical shop located on the first floor in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D D (hereinafter “instant main shop”). The Plaintiff and the Defendant respectively invested KRW 50 million, and C entered into a partnership agreement with each of the investment of KRW 20 million, and to distribute profits at the later investment ratio, and deposited KRW 50 million in the Defendant’s Financial Bank account (Account Number: G) on the same day, and also deposited KRW 20 million in the said account on the same day.
B. On September 23, 2013, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and C leased the instant main building from H to KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.4 million, and the said lease deposit was paid, and the said lease deposit was paid to KRW 70 million,00,000 as premium for the said main establishment and business, and the said main establishment began.
C. C withdrawn from the above partnership around October 2013, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed thereto, and agreed with C, to convert C’s investment of KRW 20 million into the borrowed amount. On the other hand, C’s profit from the instant principal store’s business was to be distributed at the rate of 50% according to the investment ratio of the original Defendant, and continued the said principal store’s business.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant Dong enterprise”) about the management of the original Defendant’s above main points D.
On November 2013, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) requested the Defendant to transfer the business to a third party; and (b) requested the assignee to a real estate intermediary with the consent of the Defendant.
E. However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant rejected the offer of the applicant who proposed KRW 40 million as premium for facilities and business on the ground that the amount of the premium is insufficient.
F. Since then, the instant main place of business continued to take place, the Plaintiff was working at the said main place only until March 4, 2014, and was not going to the said main place from March 5, 2014.