logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.14 2015가합11859
대여금 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From March 25, 2005 to July 2, 2009, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 530 million to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) at an annual interest rate of 18%, and C, on January 25, 2010, issued a promissory note with the maturity of KRW 530 million at the face value of Han Bank as the blank, the place of payment, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the place of payment as Han Bank (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

B. The Plaintiff presented a payment proposal of the Promissory Notes on December 31, 2014, but the said Promissory Notes were rejected due to the default of payment.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant is similar to the Plaintiff’s trade name with the same company with the same business purpose, and C continues to engage in transactions with The Home Plus Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Home Plus”), which is the existing business partner of the Plaintiff C, while using C’s office and logistics warehouse, and succeeded to the employment of C. It is deemed that the Defendant entered into a contract with C to ensure that the Defendant shall be transferred property as an organic combination of business with C and succeeds to the same business assets, thereby running the same business. Therefore, the Defendant is liable for the repayment of C’s debt to the Plaintiff as a transferee of business by mutual continued use under Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act.

B. The defendant is a company producing both horses supplied by the defendant C to the Home Puss, which is merely a new contract for the supply of goods to the Home Puss upon request of the Home Puss, and there is no fact that C made a contract for the supply of goods with the Home Puss, and there is no fact that C made a contract for the business takeover with the Home P.

3. Determination

A. The transfer of business under the relevant legal principles under the Commercial Act is a business entity organized for a certain business purpose, i.e., a human and material organization, while maintaining its identity.

arrow