대여금
1. As to KRW 35,500,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 15,00,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from December 31, 2012 to June 30, 2013.
1. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the claim shall be made on December 31, 2012, KRW 15,00,000, and KRW 10,000 on January 14, 2013: “The date of repayment shall be six months after the date of loan; the interest rate shall be 10% per annum; the interest rate after the due date shall be 20% per annum; and the interest rate after the due date shall be 20% per annum; and the interest rate shall be 3,00,000,000 on February 5, 2013; and interest rate shall be 50,000,000 on November 5, 2013; interest rate shall be 10,000,000, 300,000,000, 300,000, 200, 200, 200, 200, 300, 2005, 2000.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant’s assertion lending of this case is ① borrowed large-scale assets without a resolution of the board of directors in the state where the Defendant’s financial status is hostile (Article 393(1) of the Commercial Act); ② is a breach of trust committed by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s representative director for the purpose of using them in paying his wages, etc.; ③ is a director and a company’s own transaction without the approval of the board of directors (Article 398 of the Commercial Act); and its validity is not recognized
B. Article 393(1) of the Commercial Act provides that whether a large-scale loan of a company without a resolution of the board of directors is null and void shall be subject to a resolution of the board of directors.
Here, the issue of whether a large-scale loan constitutes a loan of property shall be determined by the representative director in light of various circumstances, such as the value of the relevant loan, the size of the company, the current status of the business or property of the company, the management status, the purpose and place of use of the relevant property, the ordinary business relations of the company, and the previous handling in the company