beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.11.24 2016가합101116

채무부존재확인

Text

1. On January 22, 2013, and February 1, 2013, with respect to the Plaintiff’s Defendant, KRW 210 million based on a monetary loan agreement.

Reasons

1. Presumed facts

A. C, while serving as the president of the Defendant from February 4, 2004 to May 2014, as the Defendant, was in charge of all the Defendant’s business. However, during the process of purchasing and developing Kimcheon-si D forest, C forged the lease contract for an apartment with the right to lease on a deposit basis with E and the right to lease on a deposit basis, and conspired to raise business funds by obtaining a loan exceeding the collateral value as if there was no deposit.

B. Accordingly, around 2012, E requested the Plaintiff, who was aware of its knowledge, to “I purchase real estate and sell it again, thereby lending the name of Hawn to obtain profit margin,” and obtained consent from the Plaintiff.

C. On January 22, 2013, E purchased the F apartment Nos. 603, 804, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff, and concluded a loan contract of KRW 210 million with the Defendant on that day, and created a collateral security worth of KRW 273 million in the name of the Defendant’s maximum debt amount.

In addition, E purchased the above apartment on January 31, 2013 under the name of the Plaintiff and completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 1, 2013, and concluded a loan contract of KRW 210 million with the Defendant (hereinafter “each of the loan contracts of this case”) with the Defendant on February 1, 2013, E created the right to collateral security of KRW 273 million with the maximum debt amount under the name of the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 13 (including virtual numbers), the result of the plaintiff's personal examination, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a)in the case where, in order to avoid the application of the laws and regulations governing the limit of loans to the same person or the internal regulations of the financial institution, a third party has been prepared in the form of a third party with respect to the amount of loans that the actual principal debtor wishes to obtain as the principal debtor, and with the understanding of this, with respect to a third party, with the intention of not being liable as the debtor, with respect to the third party, the third party has been prepared.