All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2019Da232277 Decided February 2, 2023 【Loan】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Meaning of the “intention of the parties” in Article 137 of the Civil Act stipulating the legal doctrine of partial nullity Whether the legal doctrine of partial nullity of a juristic act applies in a case where multiple contracts have been concluded as a unity in both economic and practical terms as though they are a single contract (affirmative) and, in such an instance, method of determining whether the contracts as a whole are accounted for as a single contract [2] In the case where: (a) a committee for promoting the establishment of an association for the redevelopment and improvement of the residential area (hereinafter “Committee A”) passed a resolution on the appointment of Incorporated Company B as the constructor to implement a housing redevelopment project; (b) Committee A concluded a construction contract and a loan for consumption agreement with Company B under which Company B agreed to provide Committee A with a loan of money required for implementation of the improvement project; and (c) the resolution on the appointment of constructor and the construction contract were subsequently rendered null and void, leading to the question of whether the loan for consumption agreement would also be rendered null and void, the case holding that the lower court erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations notwithstanding that, in light of the entire circumstances, there is a possibility of viewing that Committee A and Company B were intent on concluding and maintaining the loan for consumption agreement at the time of entering into the construction contract and the loan for consumption agreement, even at the prospect of the construction contract being voided | |
