Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
뉴욕총영사관소송 5만달러반환소송시크릿오브코리아 안치용

뉴욕총영사관소송 5만달러반환소송시크릿오브코리아 안치용

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,932 |Likes:
Published by pooh8582
뉴욕총영사관소송 5만달러반환소송시크릿오브코리아 안치용
뉴욕총영사관소송 5만달러반환소송시크릿오브코리아 안치용

More info:

Categories:Types, Brochures
Published by: pooh8582 on Jan 26, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/13/2014

pdf

text

original

 
1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK  _______________________________________________ Korea Consulate General New York, Index No.: Plaintiff,
COMPLAINT
-against- ISEA Communication Corp. and Andrew Choi, Defendants.  ________________________________________________ Plaintiff Korea Consulate General New York for its complaint against the above-named defendants, state upon knowledge, except where indicated otherwise, as follows:
THE PARTIES
1.
 
At all relevant times, Plaintiff Korea Consulate General New York was and still is an agency of Korean Culture and Information Service whose registered office located at 335 East 45
th
 Street New York, NY 10017. 2. At all relevant times, defendant ISEA Communication Corp. was and still is an registered New York State corporation whose principal place of business is 38 W. 32
nd
 St. Suite 403, New York, NY 10001. 3. At all relevant times, defendant Andrew Choi was and still is a president of ISEA Communication Corp. whose principal place of business is 38 W. 32
nd
 St. Suite 403, New York,  NY 10001.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/04/2013
INDEX NO. 653440/2013NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/04/2013
  릿 
 
2
4. The Court has jurisdiction based on the basis of the defendant by virtue of the CPLR § 301. 5. Venue in the County of New York is proper because it is the county of the defendants
  business.
COMMON ALLEGATION
6. In May 7
th
, 2012, defendants and plaintiff executed a mutual Agreement, whereas  plaintiff agreed to support film production and distribution of TV program services from the defendants. 7. On May 15, 2012, plaintiff made an initial payment of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), which is fifty percent (50%) of the production cost. 8. As per the Agreement, the defendants guaranteed that the Show will be aired by December 31, 2012. 9. On November 27, 2012, defendant sent a letter to the plaintiff, which assured its voluntary termination of the Contract and full return of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) by 6
th
 or 7
th
 of December, 2012. 10. On March 7, 2013, defendant sent a second notice to the plaintiff, which agreed to return Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) by end of March, 2013.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF Count One
 – 
 Breach of Contract
11. Paragraphs 1 through 12 are incorporated by reference.
  릿 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->