beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.12.17 2015나2010347

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company aimed at the branch distribution business, etc., and the Co-Defendant A Co-Defendant A Co-Defendant A Co-Defendant A Co-Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) is a company aimed at printing and publishing, and Defendant D was the representative director of A from the time of its establishment to October 16, 2012.

B. On January 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a goods supply agreement with A to supply the goods to A, and supplied the goods. The Plaintiff did not receive KRW 215,170,565, out of the amount of goods supplied to A between June 201 and June 2013.

C. Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is a company established on November 21, 2013 for the purpose of printing, publishing, etc. The representative director of Defendant C is Defendant D, and A discontinued on December 31, 2013.

The defendant C's workplace is in the Pacific City G, and E, F, I, and J, who were working in A, as an employee of the defendant C, and the defendant C uses the printing machines used in A (Sroland 4 color printing machines, 5 color printing machines, and Agpa printing machines).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness E of the first instance court and witness E of F, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Defendant D is a major shareholder of A who substantially controls A while establishing and operating A. In order to evade the obligation when there is a lot of debt and managerial difficulties, Defendant D established and traded with the same customer by using a printing machine used by the employees who worked in A while performing their duties. As such, Defendant C is a company established to evade the obligation of A, and even if not, it is a company established to evade the obligation of A, and thus, it is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price of the goods.2) Defendant D is practically controlling A and Defendant C.