logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.05.29 2014나2046301
계약해제로 인한 원상회복 청구 등
Text

1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the claims extended in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is a stock company.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant, while operating a personal enterprise in the trade name of “B”, was to receive a proposal from D for a defect in the domestic freezing and scraping import business from “B,” and was appointed as the representative director by establishing B, a stock company, and taking office as the representative director.

Since then, D is mainly in charge of the import of trends in China, and the defendant has been mainly in charge of the customs clearance and sale of trends and fund management in Korea.

(hereinafter “B”). (b)

On March 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a high supply contract (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with D and B stating that “B shall receive the advance payment from the Plaintiff and supply the advance payment to the Plaintiff” (hereinafter “the instant supply contract”). The Plaintiff paid the advance payment to B and received the import trends.

C. From December 21, 2007 due to B’s accumulation and aggravation of management status, D and the Defendant: (a) up to December 21, 2007, the accumulated weight of unpaid goods to the Plaintiff was about KRW 480 million in total at the market price; (b) even if personal debts were to be paid by the Plaintiff, even though they did not have any intent or ability to supply the drilling of an additional 100 tons; and (c) on December 26, 2007, two persons were to deliver E and deliver “100 tons of unpaid goods to the land price,” and then, (d) deliver all additional 100 tons of unpaid goods to the Plaintiff from 00 tons at the latest on February 2, 207 until the end of 2008, and (e) transfer the price to 300 billion in total from 200 tons at the end of 200 to 3000 tons of additional 100 tons of the market price, and (e) transfer it to 306.7.28.28 months.

Since then, D and the defendant were investigated by E by the representative director of the plaintiff, and as a result, they acquired 476,730,000 won by fraud.

arrow