채권자 대위 등 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. B Co., Ltd.’s Defendant KRW 800,000,000, April 18, 2014, and April 2014.
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant is the internal director of B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) and the spouse of C, the former representative director.
B. B on July 19, 2007, sold D and 18 parcels and its ground buildings, etc. (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in two weeks, both of which were sold at KRW 21,60,000,000.
However, there was a dispute over the payment of the balance of the purchase price, and thereafter on September 26, 2013, the conciliation (Seoul Central District Court 201Gahap17742 (principal lawsuit) and 2012Gahap102525 (Counterclaim)) was made to the effect that “Japan Construction shall pay KRW 3,000,000 to B until February 28, 2014.”
C. On April 18, 2014, Japan-Japan Construction appears to have been paid after 1,980,069,320 won (excluding part of national taxes and local taxes, etc. that B was in arrears at the time of the remainder of the real estate purchase price in this case.
B paid the Defendant the sum of KRW 1,600,000,000 on April 18, 2014, and the sum of KRW 800,000,000 on April 29, 2014, and KRW 1,600,000,00 on April 29, 2014.
(hereinafter referred to as "the instant payment act". B completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 30, 2014 with respect to the instant real estate in Japanese comprehensive construction.
B filed a corporate tax return on November 28, 2014 with the tax base amount of KRW 12,637,714,896 (=income amount of 13,410,523,656 - Loss carried forward 772,808,760). On May 1, 2015, the president of the tax office affiliated with the Plaintiff determined and notified the corporate tax amount of KRW 2,537,586,290 (hereinafter “instant tax claim”).
[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-9, Eul evidence No. 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. Plaintiff 1) The primary claim B lent KRW 1,600,000 to the Defendant through the instant payment act. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return the above loan KRW 1,600,000 to the Plaintiff who subrogated to insolvent B. (2) The instant preliminary claim cannot be deemed as lending, even if it cannot be deemed as lending.