(영문) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.02.04 2015가단34832

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.02.04 2015가단34832

보증채무금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. A. Around February 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for transfer and acquisition with C, with a total of KRW 120,000,000 and KRW 151,00,000, total of KRW 31,000,000 and the equipment cost for start-up.

B. Around July 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant confirmed the terms and conditions of the contract entered into between the Plaintiff and C, and entered into a contract for acquisition and transfer of stocks with the content that C will pay on behalf of the Defendant if C fails to perform its obligations under the transfer and acquisition contract within one month from the date of preparation of the contract.

C. C above:

Inasmuch as the Defendant did not perform the obligation under the contract for transfer or acquisition as stated in the port, it is against the Plaintiff.

An internal director's right and a stock transfer contract mentioned in paragraph (1) are obligated to pay KRW 151,00,000 according to the stock transfer contract.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's above 1.-B

As alleged in paragraph (1), “in-house director’s right and share transfer/acquisition contract” (Evidence A No. 1-5) is admitted as evidence that conforms to the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an in-house director’s right and share transfer/acquisition contract.

The plaintiff asserts that the above in-house director's right and share transfer contract are recognized as having been sealed by the defendant. The defendant asserts that there is no signature and seal on the above in-house director's right and share transfer contract.

B. Regarding this, first of all, the signature of Defendant B, which is indicated in the above internal director's right and stock transfer and takeover contract, is very similar to the writing of the name of "C" as stated in the same "A" (Evidence 1-5 of the evidence No. 1-5 of the same Act). In addition, this contract between the Plaintiff and C is the Plaintiff's agreement of transfer and takeover (Evidence 1-1 of the evidence No. 1 of the above agreement).

corresponding to the arguments described in the subsection.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.04.14 2016가단22724

-서울북부지방법원 2018.06.21 2017나4834

-청주지방법원 2016.12.23 2016고정549

-수원지방법원성남지원 2014.10.10 2014가단14237

-서울남부지방법원 2017.10.27 2016가합106972