beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 3-1 to 3, Eul evidence 4-1, 2, Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 6, and part of the testimony of party witness C.
On October 28, 2004, the Defendant issued a promissory note with the face value of KRW 150,000,000 at face value, and the due date of December 31, 2008, and entrusted the Plaintiff with the preparation of a notarial deed to the effect that, if a notary public delays in the payment of the said promissory note under No. 967 of the law firm regular notarial deed as of December 31, 2008, no objection is raised even if it is subject to compulsory execution (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”).
Since then, on October 28, 2004, the Plaintiff paid KRW 75,000,000 to the Defendant’s birth, and transferred KRW 40,000,000 to the account in Gyeongck Co., Ltd. on December 3, 2004, and KRW 75,000,000 in total by remitting KRW 35,00,000 to the account in Gyeongck Co., Ltd. on December 3, 2004.
B. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) is a company established on July 19, 2004 for the purpose of manufacturing and processing human resources, and the Plaintiff owned 51% of the shares of Nonparty Company. The Plaintiff paid KRW 150,000,000 to Nonparty Company as the purchase price for the automatic lighting machine to be used by Nonparty Company (hereinafter “instant machine”). At the time, the de facto operator of Nonparty Company was C.
C. The Plaintiff and C did not have prepared an investment contract or a partnership agreement, and the Plaintiff did not receive dividends from C or Nonparty Company, while C agreed to operate the E and Nonparty Company as a partnership business around April 2007, and written a partnership agreement specifying the division of business and the distribution of profits.
The head office of the company on December 31, 2004 when the non-party company leased the land and its ground buildings located in G in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, that the plaintiff agreed to purchase from the plaintiff around December 2004 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).