beta
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2020.07.08 2019가단228904

양수금

Text

1. The defendant shall be incorporated with B, C, and limited liability companies D and KRW 35,258,300 among them and KRW 35,000,000 among them.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 14, 2009, the non-party Credit Guarantee Fund received a favorable judgment against the defendant (the trade name was changed to E, and the latter was changed to F, which was changed to the current trade name) and B, C, and D, with the Jeonju District Court Decision 2009Gahap3226, that "the defendant jointly joined the plaintiff and paid 35,258,300,000 won to the plaintiff and 35,000,000 won, which was calculated at the rate of 6% per annum from November 23, 1997 to March 12, 1999, and 25% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

(hereinafter “Prior Judgment”). B.

On November 29, 2013, the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund transferred the instant advanced judgment claim to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 4 of the Act on the Efficient Disposal of Non-Performing Assets, etc. of Financial Companies and the Establishment of Korea Asset Management Corporation, and at that time notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims.

C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the extension of extinctive prescription of claims based on the preceding judgment.

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2-1, and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay 35,258,300 won and 35,000,000 won of the principal of the judgment and 35,000 won of the principal to the plaintiff who acquired the claim of the preceding judgment in collaboration with B, C, and limited liability companies D, with 6% per annum from November 23, 1997 to March 12, 1999 as the plaintiff seeks, and 25% per annum from the next day to May 31, 2019, and 12% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

B. The defendant's representative director G was confirmed to have no debt from the former representative director at the time of acquiring the defendant's company. Thus, the present defendant company shall repay the debt of this case.