beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.07.13 2014가합1521

양수금

Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 500,000,000 won and the period from October 1, 1998 to October 28, 1998.

Reasons

Summary of Claim

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants (including Defendant A’s father E) and F in Jeonju District Court 2003Kahap1945 claim for transfer money and received the judgment of citing the following order, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 30, 2004.

The defendants jointly and severally pay to the plaintiff 1,304,279,476 won and 24% per annum from October 1, 1998 to October 28, 1998; 22% per annum from the next day to February 22, 1999; 19% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment; and 19% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

B. The Defendants of the above judgment did not pay to the Plaintiff the money for which payment was ordered in the above judgment, and Defendant A inherited the property of Party E solely upon the death of Party E on October 3, 2006.

C. The Plaintiff shall claim against the Defendants the amount of KRW 50 million from October 1, 1998 to October 28, 1998, 24% per annum from the next day to the next day, 22% per annum from February 22, 1999, and 19% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

Judgment on Defendant Jink Co., Ltd.

A. 1) The defense prior to the merits of the instant case is deemed to have been dissolved on December 4, 2001, and its legal personality has been extinguished as a result of the closure of liquidation and registration as of December 5, 2004. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant in the instant case against the Defendant in question is unlawful as against a person without the legal capacity (the above Defendant’s claim is extinguished as of its legal personality, and thus, should be dismissed as of the ground for appeal. However, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant in question is alleged to have been dismissed as of December 5, 2004.

(2) The Supreme Court Decision 94Da7607 delivered on May 27, 1994 ruled that even a Dormant Company, which is dissolved under Article 520-2 of the Commercial Act and whose liquidation is deemed to have been terminated, if there is a need to be arranged in reality due to the existence of a legal relationship, it shall not be completely extinguished to the extent of its scope.