logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.06.18 2013고정803
경매방해등
Text

1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 won;

2. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant interfering with auction is the joint representative director of G Co., Ltd. who was the former owner of the land and building in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon. Nonparty H is a director of the I Co., Ltd. (former J Co.) that performed remodeling of the above building and the actual operator of K Co., Ltd., and if the above building enters the procedure for compulsory auction, the Defendant would be likely to not receive the money related to the transfer of stocks, etc., and Nonparty H would not receive the said remodeling construction cost properly.

On September 24, 2009, Nonparty H, as the former owner of the above building did not receive the construction cost related to remodeling from the Defendant, purchased the above building by means of receiving the entire stocks of the Defendant’s G from the former owner, and thereafter changed the company name to K, set the creditor company, Dong Branch Mutual Savings Bank, by securing the building, adding some loans to the previous G loans, and succeeded to this, and then, on September 24, 2009, written waiver of the right of retention to the said Savings Bank that “The said Savings Bank will not thereafter seek the right to report the lien, etc. at the time of executing the security right, because the construction cost of the said building was settled in full with the subcontractor in relation to the remodeling construction cost of the instant building.

Since then, around February 23, 2012, the Defendant, Nonparty H, and the employees in charge of the sub-contractor of the remodeling project, in the auction of the Daejeon District Court located in Seo-gu Daejeon District Court, Seo-gu, Daejeon District Court, in the above case of voluntary auction of the "F" buildings, the remodeling project was completed in the name of the creditor of the Dong District Savings Bank, under the name of the creditor of the Dong District Savings Bank, as above, in the above case of voluntary auction of the above court, as to the "F" buildings, which was completed under the name of the creditor of the Dong Savings Bank, and thus, in spite of the fact that the right of retention cannot be exercised based on the remodeling construction cost, the above I was mutually wounded, and the M& corporation, which is the subcontractor of

arrow