beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 310,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 20, 2018 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 29, 2017, the Defendant received 260 million won from C on December 29, 2017, and 50 million won on January 4, 2018.
B. On January 17, 2018, the Plaintiff received a loan amounting to KRW 310 million from C to the Defendant, and C notified the Defendant on January 18, 2018. The Defendant was served on January 19, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of loan claims by C constitutes a litigation trust with the main purpose of enabling the Plaintiff to conduct litigation, and thus, it is unlawful.
In a case where the assignment of claims, etc. primarily with the intention of allowing the transfer of claims, etc., is made, Article 7 of the Trust Act shall be applied mutatis mutandis even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, and thus, Article 7 of the Trust Act shall be deemed null and void. Whether it is the principal purpose of the litigation shall be determined in light of all the circumstances, including the developments and methods of concluding the assignment of claims contract, the interval between the transfer contract and the filing of the lawsuit, and the personal relationship between the transferor and the transferee, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da4210, Dec. 6, 2002). The issue of whether the transfer of claims in this case was made mainly with the intention of enabling the acquisition of claims in this case to conduct procedural acts, and the full bench received all the defendant's application for evidence
Nevertheless, the Defendant applied for only a part of the submission order of the financial transaction information that was promised to apply for, and did not apply for a witness. Only two days before the trial date, the Defendant applied for the submission order of the remaining financial transaction information and requested the time to prove it in the method of summons.
In addition, each of the above evidence applications is in the name of the plaintiff C and C's non-existence of monetary transactions with the plaintiff.