beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 321,430,00 and each year from January 1, 2015 to August 1, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 12, 2011, Defendant C established and operated the Defendant Company for the purpose of collecting and producing rice snow (i.e., rice eye, i., e., embryos, and shotout in the process of Domination) on July 12, 201 (i.e., the trade name was D at the time of incorporation, but the trade name was changed to E on October 9, 201, E on August 3, 201, E Co., Ltd., an agricultural company on August 3, 2015, and as of August 11, 2016.
(2) Around June 2012, 2012, in-house directors F, the representative of the Defendant Company, established the Plaintiff for the purpose of distributing and selling rice snow-related products.
(B) On June 23, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company entered into an exclusive supply contract including “the Plaintiff exclusively supplies the entire product to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff establishes a market base, and lend KRW 500 million to the Defendant Company,” and “the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company mutually transfer 49% of the shares in possession of the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company.” (B) Pursuant to each of the above contracts, the Plaintiff lent KRW 500 million to the Defendant Company (hereinafter a separate loan) around July 2012 through August 8, 2012, and the Defendant Company produced and supplied rice materials to the Plaintiff after purchasing the rice string machine with money.
2) In the foregoing process, the Plaintiff paid in advance rice snow supply to the Defendant Company, who was suffering from the financial difficulties, from October 2012 to October 2013, 2013, totaling KRW 551,441,500 (hereinafter “the instant advance payment”).
(3) On December 2, 2013, the Defendant Company notified the Plaintiff of the termination of each of the above contracts on the grounds of nonperformance of obligations under the above exclusive supply contract and the same business contract. On December 17, 2013, the Plaintiff seized corporeal movables owned by the Defendant Company as a provisional attachment on December 17, 2013, and around February 2014, the representative of the Defendant Company was the monopoly supply contract.