beta
Text
1. Defendant C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 190,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 21, 2018 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Nonparty A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) was declared bankrupt on July 12, 2017 (U.S. District Court 2017Hahap8) and was in fact closed from February 2015.
B. On February 2, 2015, from February 2, 2015 to June 6, 2015, A remitted KRW 250 million from the corporate passbook in the name of “E” to the personal passbook in the name of “E”, and on February 6, 2015, remitted KRW 190 million to Defendant C for loan repayment, and KRW 60 million to Defendant D on February 7, 2015, respectively.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. On February 6, 2015, in-house director E of the claim, remitted KRW 190 million as a loan repayment to Defendant C on February 6, 2015. Such an act of repayment is deemed to be subject to avoidance as an act committed by A with knowledge that it would prejudice other bankruptcy creditors. Thus, Defendant C is entitled to KRW 190 million as above and damages for delay.
(b) Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D
A. On February 7, 2015, the Plaintiff’s in-house director E transferred KRW 60 million to Defendant D, a wife, as a means of loan repayment. Such an act of repayment is deemed to be subject to avoidance as an act having knowledge that A would impair other bankruptcy creditors. As such, Defendant D is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 60 million and damages for delay.
B. The Plaintiff’s assertion is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s act of remitting KRW 60 million to Defendant D on February 7, 2015, which was aware that the transfer of KRW 60 million to Defendant D was performed by Defendant D on February 7, 2015, and was prejudicial to the other bankruptcy creditors of A, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The Plaintiff’s assertion is with merit.