beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the full amount of KRW 12,741,697,897 and KRW 6,134,234,738 from September 21, 2015.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. On April 16, 2010, the Defendant entered into a loan agreement with A (hereinafter “A”) under which the Defendant received a loan amounting to KRW 8 billion (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) by setting as 10% per annum for interest from A, 20% per annum for interest for interest, and 8 billion won per annum for interest for interest, and the due date for payment as of April 16, 2013.
On April 16, 2010, A remitted the sum of KRW 7,99,350,000 to the Defendant’s bank account (C).
B. As of September 20, 2015, the principal and interest of the instant loan agreement amounting to KRW 12,741,697,897 in total (i.e., the principal and interest of the loan principal amounting to KRW 6,134,234,738 in total or interest for delay ( KRW 6,607,463,159 in total).
C. Meanwhile, on February 2, 2012, the Daejeon District Court declared bankruptcy against A and appointed the Plaintiff as the bankruptcy trustee.
(Reasons for Recognition) The Daejeon District Court 2012Hau1. [Ground for Recognition] / [Ground for Recognition] The parties to the dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, as a whole.
A. The Plaintiff claims to the Defendant for payment of the principal and interest of loans totaling KRW 12,741,697,897 and delay damages therefrom under the instant loan agreement.
B. As to this, the Defendant: (a) concluded the instant loan agreement under the name of the Defendant, and used the loan for the gallon operating expenses and the purchase expenses of the D Group’s side; and (b) the D Group intended not to be liable to the Defendant as a debtor under the instant loan agreement; (c) accordingly, the Defendant asserts that the instant loan agreement is null and void as a false declaration of agreement.
C. As to this, even if the loan agreement of this case is null and void as a false conspiracy, the plaintiff was declared bankrupt and the plaintiff was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy. Thus, the plaintiff asserted that the loan agreement of this case cannot be asserted against the plaintiff as invalid as a false conspiracy, since it constitutes a third party acting in good faith under Article 108 (2) of the
Judgment
The evidence No. 3, No. 1, No. 2, 8, 21, 22, 25, 26, 29, and 30 of the fact that the conspiracy is false.