beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 313,696,93 and KRW 274,742,90 among them, from December 30, 1994 to April 21, 2006.
Reasons
1. The defendant's decision on the defense prior to the merits of this case asserted that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful since it was filed against the defendant without a legal personality, which was a legal entity terminated on December 8, 2004.
However, even if a registration for the completion of liquidation for a juristic person has been made, if it is not deemed to have been completed, the juristic person shall be competent to be a party.
A. (See Supreme Court Decision 97Da3408 delivered on April 22, 1997) and even if a company is dissolved and its liquidation is deemed to have been completed pursuant to Article 520-2(1) through (4) of the Commercial Act, if the legal relationship remains and it is necessary to adjust it in reality, it shall not be completely extinguished within the scope of the above.
(See Supreme Court Order 90Ma672 delivered on April 30, 191). In the case of this case, since the defendant still has a claim and obligation with respect to the plaintiff's obligation for indemnity, it cannot be deemed that the liquidation work has been completed, and since the defendant is a liquidated juristic person, it shall be deemed that it has a party ability to do so, the defendant's prior defense on the merits is without merit.
2. The judgment on the merits is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 313,696,93 (i.e., KRW 274,742,90 for delay damages of KRW 34,580,880 for substitute payments of KRW 4,373,210 for delay damages of KRW 274,742,90 for the remainder of the subrogated amount of KRW 274,742,90 for the amount of KRW 274,742,90 for the remainder of the subrogated amount from December 30, 1994 to April 21, 206; (b) the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 15% for each year from April 22, 2006 to September 30, 2015, from October 1, 2015 to the date of full reimbursement; or (c) the Defendant shall have an obligation to provide evidence No. 1, No. 22, and evidence No.35-1.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.