beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor KRW 52,082,336 and KRW 51,482,408 among them.
Reasons
1. According to the Plaintiff’s respective evidence Nos. 1-2 and 2-4 as to the Plaintiff’s claim, it is recognized that the Plaintiff transferred the claim against the Defendant to the Intervenor succeeding to the instant lawsuit on May 20, 2016, while the instant lawsuit is pending, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit without further review as to the remainder.
2. Determination as to the claim of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor
A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence 1-1 as to the cause of the claim, it is recognized that the facts identical to the entries in the cause of the claim in the separate sheet are acknowledged, and the fact that the plaintiff transferred the claim to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor on May 20, 2016 to the defendant is recognized as above, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount set forth in Paragraph 2 of the Disposition to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor.
B. On September 12, 2013, the Defendant concluded a loan contract with the Nonparty Hyundai Social Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) as alleged by the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor. However, the Defendant asserts to the effect that, in fact, it is intended to use Nonparty B as the purchase fund at a house, it is intended to change the name of the loan holder to B if the two employees in charge of loan of the Nonparty Company were to be the director in charge of B, and thus, it would not be possible to respond to the Plaintiff’s claim by the Plaintiff succeeding intervenor.
Therefore, it is not sufficient to recognize the evidence alone with the statement Nos. 1 and 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.