양수금
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A Co., Ltd.: (a) from December 28, 2000 to December 2001, 2000 to KRW 35 million among them. < Amended by Act No. 6438, Dec. 28, 2000>
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 26, 2006, the bankruptcy trustee of the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation of the Maritime Credit Union, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) and E, etc. with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2005Da199814, the court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff that “The Defendant Co., Ltd and E jointly and severally received the payment of the amount of KRW 1 billion to the Plaintiff and KRW 500 million each year from December 28, 2000 to January 27, 2001; KRW 25 million each year from the following day to the date of full payment; and KRW 50 million each year from November 27, 2000 to December 27, 2000 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the judgment against the Plaintiff”).
B. The judgment of the previous suit was finalized on November 23, 2006 for the defendant company, and on October 28, 2006 for E.
C. On September 3, 2010, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation transferred a claim based on the judgment in a prior suit to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant Company and E of the assignment by means of content-certified mail on December 20 of the same year.
On the other hand, the Defendant C and D, his/her spouse, died on May 31, 2012, inherited his/her property. Thereafter, the Defendants received an adjudication on the acceptance of a report on the inheritance limited recognition by Suwon District Court 2016Mo3042 on March 22, 2017.
[Ground for recognition] O Defendant Company: Confession (Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act) O Defendant B, C, and D: The absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff, as part of the plaintiff's claim, the money (in the case of defendants B, C, and D, within the scope of the property inherited from the network E, the money determined according to each inheritance share) as stated in paragraph (1) of this Article.
3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is with merit.