beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.01.13 2015가합206939

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Company is a company established for the purpose of construction business, etc. on or around June 20, 201, and C (hereinafter “C”) is a company established for the purpose of housing construction business, etc. on or around July 18, 2002.

B. C around November 27, 2002, around November 27, 2002, drafted to the Plaintiff a notarial deed of debt repayment contract with the following content as the certificate of law firm Daegu General Law Office No. 2760.

On November 27, 2002, Article 1 of the Notarial Deed Co., Ltd., the obligor Co., Ltd. approved the following obligation from the obligee, offered to pay the obligation in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and accepted it by the obligee.

· Debt Amount: Loans, dividends, and the place of repayment at which payment has been made on May 31, 2006: The address of the creditor or the method of designation and repayment thereof: The gold 30 million won on February 28, 2006 and the gold 30 million won on May 31, 2006 shall be repaid in installments, respectively.

When the obligor delays the repayment of principal or interest, the obligor shall pay the obligee damages for delay at the rate of 25% per annum on the principal or interest.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 1

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The alleged directors of C, E, and F serve as officers such as inside directors and auditors of the Defendant Company. The purpose of incorporation is similar to the Defendant Company. The location of the Defendant Company’s main office is located in the same building as C, the money deposited in the name of shareholders in the financial account of the Defendant Company should be deemed to have been deposited by using C’s assets or D’s funds, and D has used approximately KRW 2.1 billion sales proceeds from the sale of land owned by C while establishing the Defendant Company. As such, the Defendant Company should be deemed to be the same company established to evade the Plaintiff’s obligations to the Plaintiff, the Defendant Company is jointly and severally with C.