beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the Plaintiff’s addition or supplementary determination as to the part concerning which the Plaintiff contests as the grounds for appeal as the grounds for appeal, and therefore, it is citing it as it is by the main text
2. Additional and supplementary judgments
A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in light of whether the instant contract is null and void as stated in subparagraph 1-2, the witness H of the first instance trial, and the purport of the entire testimony and pleading by the witness of the first instance trial, and I, the instant contract is deemed to provide money and valuables to the president of the instant association, who is deemed a public official pursuant to Article 84 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, in relation to the selection of a construction project, and thus the motive indicated therein constitutes anti
Therefore, the instant contract is null and void in accordance with Article 103 of the Civil Act.
① He testified to the effect that “D and F, upon entering into a consultation and publicity service contract on the instant project between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, shall deliver KRW 100 million out of the service price to the head of the association, and the Defendant may be selected as the contractor of the instant project only if the contract for consultation and publicity was entered into.”
(2) During the aforementioned testimony, H made concrete statements concerning the reasons why the service cost was set at KRW 400 million and the method of raising KRW 100 million to deliver it to the partnership president.
Furthermore, as seen below, it seems that the contents of the statement correspond to the text message sent by D, and it appears that the actual F was possessed with the name of F, etc., the credibility of the statement seems to be high.
③ On July 19, 2015, the Plaintiff’s director D sent it to H well-known.
At present, the president of the C.C.