(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.01.24 2017나23769

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) 울산지방법원 2019.01.24 2017나23769

약정금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 12, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a business agreement with B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) on the content that the Plaintiff would receive KRW 400-5 million per household with respect to G apartment on the scale of 16,000,000,000 from the F in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and 5,000,000,000 for each household and to construct an internal framework (hereinafter “instant apartment agreement”).

According to the agreement of this case, the plaintiff shall be paid KRW 100 million as the amount of the agreement, and shall be returned in full after three months.

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 90 million to Defendant C’s account, the spouse of Defendant C, at the time of the conclusion of the agreement pursuant to the instant agreement, at the request of Defendant C, who is an employee (the head of the management team), and paid KRW 10 million in cash to Defendant C around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. 1) Defendant C is not entitled to obtain the construction right because the apartment of this case is not owned by B, and the apartment of this case is owned by B, and the apartment of this case is deemed to be owned by B, and the construction right is secured by B, so it makes the Plaintiff enter into the agreement of this case, and acquired KRW 100 million on the pretext of the agreement money. Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay the above money to the Plaintiff as compensation for intentional tort. 2) Even though Defendant C is not aware of the above money by deceiving the Plaintiff, Defendant C has the obligation to secure the apartment construction right and contract the construction of the mold to the Plaintiff, but the obligation was not fulfilled. Defendant C is obligated to compensate for damages equivalent to the above agreement money suffered by the Plaintiff due to negligence in breach of the obligation under the above agreement.

3 Defendant D-C.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2017.08.08 2015가단31567

-서울동부지방법원 2019.01.11 2018가단120385

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2020.06.03 2019가단3936

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.10.14 2020가단71754

-대전지방법원 2016.04.28 2015가단212289