logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.29 2018가합512803
정산금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an executor of the business (hereinafter “instant apartment project”) that newly constructs and sells E apartment units on the ground of 25,062 square meters of land in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant apartment unit”). The Intervenor joining the Defendant is a contractor who entered into a contract for the construction of the instant apartment unit with the Plaintiff on June 28, 2011 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On September 27, 2011, the Plaintiff concluded a management-type land trust business agreement (hereinafter “instant business agreement”) with Defendant, Defendant, Defendant Intervenor, Defendant Intervenor, Defendant Intervenor, Defendant F, and Defendant F, a lending institution, and the Plaintiff. Around that time, the Plaintiff concluded a management-type land trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with Defendant, Defendant F, Company G, which determined the division of duties and the duty of cooperation to achieve the objectives of the instant business. Defendant and G, etc. were the first priority beneficiary, Defendant F, the second priority beneficiary, Defendant F, the third priority beneficiary, the Defendant Intervenor, and the Plaintiff as the truster and beneficiary, and the sale-type land trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”).

C. Although the apartment of this case began to sell the apartment around November 201, the sales rate of the apartment of this case was merely 19.1% around July 201, the sales agency was de facto suspended, such as the withdrawal of the sales agency. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor entered into the agreement on September 13, 2013 (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and entered into the agreement on September 13, 2013 (hereinafter “instant agreement”). The main contents are as follows.

The plaintiff for the same year

9. 25. The defendant notified the defendant of the agreement accompanied by the instant agreement.

Article 2 (Project Reorganizations, etc.) (1) and (2) of the Intervenor A (Supplementary Intervenor) transfer the ownership of the following real estate, among the trust property of the project, to a person designated by A or A, to the extent that it does not violate the Business-Related Arrangements and Loan-Related Agreements, and thereby Gap’s project reorganization costs are paid.

arrow