물품대금 청구
Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim amounting to KRW 38,520,084 is dismissed.
The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.
The costs of lawsuit.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a general partner of a limited partnership company C (hereinafter “C”).
On April 25, 2016, the Seoul Rehabilitation Court (2016Hahap29) was declared bankrupt.
B. On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied herb drugs to C, and on June 23, 2016, the bankruptcy trustee agreed that C had a claim for the herb price of KRW 487,929,200 against C (hereinafter “instant claim”).
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (if there is an additional number, including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the parties' arguments;
A. The Plaintiff has a claim for oriental medicine price of KRW 487,929,200 against the Plaintiff, but the property of the Plaintiff is insufficient to repay the instant claim. As such, the Plaintiff sought payment of the instant claim against the Defendant, who is a general partner of C pursuant to Articles 269 and 212(1) of the Commercial Act.
B. Defendant 1) As to KRW 456,103,944 among the instant claims prior to the merits, Defendant D and E (E) (hereinafter “E”) as the Plaintiff’s obligee.
(2) Since F’s claim was issued for the attachment and collection order, the Plaintiff did not have the standing to institute the instant lawsuit against this part. (2) The Plaintiff’s claim on the merits (i) as to the claim of KRW 240 million, among the instant claim, was already transferred to G, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant has the claim for herb payment amounting to KRW 240 million against the Defendant is without merit.
② The general partner with unlimited liability in a limited partnership company is obligated to perform the company’s obligations jointly and severally with the company, if it is impossible to fully repay the company’s obligations with its assets or if compulsory execution against the company’s assets is not effective. Since bankruptcy proceedings are in progress with the nature of compulsory execution procedure against C, it does not constitute a case where compulsory execution against the company’s assets are not effective, and thus, the requirements for performing the general partner’
③ The Plaintiff and C.