양수금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the last 9th and 10th and 3th and 10th each “ August 18, 2018,” respectively; and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant addss a new argument to this court, “an additional judgment” as to this new argument, and thus, (c) it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion held against the Plaintiff KRW 40,00,000 (=10,000 x 4,000)’s claim for the payment of share capital. However, on April 9, 2019, the Defendant transferred all of the claim for the payment of share capital and the rights incidental thereto against the Plaintiff to the Defendant, and notified the Plaintiff of the assignment of the claim on April 15, 2019, and the said notification reached the Plaintiff on April 16, 2019.
Accordingly, the defendant shall set off the above claim for payment of the share price against the defendant in the amount equal to that of the plaintiff's share price claim for the transfer of the shares in this case.
B. Determination 1) In a case where the assignment of a claim is made with the main purpose of having a litigant conduct the litigation, Article 6 of the Trust Act is applied mutatis mutandis even if the assignment of claim does not fall under a trust under the Trust Act, and thus, is null and void. The main purpose of which is to conduct the litigation ought to be determined in light of the following circumstances, including the course and method of concluding the assignment of claim contract, interval between the transfer contract and the filing of the lawsuit, and the status relationship between the transferor and the transferee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da272103, Oct. 25, 2018). 2) In full view of the following circumstances that can be seen in light of the foregoing legal principles, comprehensively taking into account: (a) the description of evidence No. 8 and the overall purport of the pleading, the main purpose of which the Defendant asserts is to enable the Defendant to conduct the litigation of offset defense; and (b) therefore, Article
Therefore, the defendant's defense of set-off remains.