logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.12 2016가합520374
손해배상 및 사해행위취소
Text

1. Defendant C’s KRW 243,340,00 for Plaintiff A and 5% per annum from April 18, 2014 to January 12, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship between the parties 1) Plaintiff A (hereinafter “Plaintiff A”)

) A Canada is a Canadian company that has domicile in Qubebec, and Plaintiff B (hereinafter “Plaintiff B”).

(2) As a Canadian, the Plaintiff is the representative of the Plaintiff A. 2) Defendant Tinland (hereinafter “Defendant Tinland”) is an executor of the F apartment of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “F apartment”), and Defendant Asian Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Asian Trust”) is a trustee company with the authority to sell the F apartment according to the trust agreement entered into with Defendant Tinland around July 30, 2009.

3) Defendant Asia Trust and the Intervenor joining Ireland (hereinafter “ Intervenor”)

A) Around January 2014, the Intervenor entered into a sales agency contract with Defendant Asian Trust with the content that the Intervenor will vicariously sell F apartment units, and the F apartment units sales agency office (hereinafter “instant sales agency office”) from around that time to February 2015 from that time.

(4) The defendant C operated the non-party corporation G, separate from the defendant Bobaland, which operated the sales agency company, as a person who announced the person who wants to purchase the F apartment as the sales agency of this case to enter into the sales contract (However, as there is a dispute between the parties regarding the specific status and authority of the defendant C to carry out the above business, since it is in dispute between the parties concerned), and the non-party corporation G, separate from the defendant Bobaland.

5) Defendant C’s children are Defendant C’s children. (b) Plaintiff C’s application for parcelling-out, etc. 1) sought explanation from Defendant C that F’s H-dong 1602 unit (hereinafter “instant apartment”) may be sold at a discount. In order to purchase the instant apartment, Defendant D prepared an application for pre-sale of apartment (Evidence A) in the Plaintiff’s name at the instant sales agency office on January 13, 2014.

arrow