beta
Text
1. The Defendant A Cooperatives’s annual relationship between May 8, 2013 and December 11, 2013 with respect to KRW 142,200,000 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 5, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the instant logistics center in Jung-gu Incheon (hereinafter “instant logistics center”). On December 26, 2010, the Plaintiff concluded a management and operation agreement with the Defendant Union and entrusted the instant logistics center to the Defendant Union from January 201 to January 20, 201.
B. Defendant B and 3 were members of the Defendant Union, and around November 201, the Defendant Union filed an application for seizure of 10 kinds of goods, such as the book author used by the Defendant Union within the instant logistics center (hereinafter “instant goods”).
C. From December 7, 2011 to March 6, 2013, 201, corporeal movables auction on the instant sold goods conducted 13 times in total was inspected. On May 8, 2013, G was awarded a successful bid of KRW 22,540,00 in the auction procedure conducted on May 8, 2013 (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). Accordingly, Defendant B was awarded KRW 5,586,573; Defendant C was paid KRW 2,218,019; Defendant D was paid KRW 4,17,270; Defendant E was paid KRW 8,793,679, respectively (hereinafter “instant dividend”).
However, among the goods sold in the instant case, the Plaintiff’s goods are “those owned by the Plaintiff.”
(E) At the time of the establishment of the instant logistics center, the Plaintiff owned the Plaintiff and transferred the instant sold goods to the Defendant. The appraised value of the instant sold goods is KRW 191,050,000, and the appraised value of the instant sold goods is KRW 142,200,000 among them. Since then, the Defendant Union concluded a contract to purchase the instant sold goods from H, the owner of the instant goods as of September 26, 2013, with the purchase price of KRW 100,000 in a lump sum, but did not pay the purchase price up to now. 【The fact that there was no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Party A’s evidence 1 through 10, and Party B’s evidence 1 and 1.