beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. On March 8, 2012 and March 23, 2012, the Plaintiff leased KRW 200 million to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), interest rate of KRW 100 million per annum (interest rate of KRW 25% per annum), KRW 100 million on December 31, 2012 due, and KRW 100 million on February 28, 2013, each of which was leased to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and on July 5, 2012, the Plaintiff notified D Co., Ltd. of the transfer of the right to claim the return of the lease deposit (hereinafter “instant lease deposit claim”) under the lease agreement for the Jeju-based performance hall and dormitory building located in E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and the transfer of the right to claim the repayment of the lease deposit (hereinafter “instant lease deposit claim”) to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).
B. After that, on March 26, 2013, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order ( Jeju District Court 2013TTT 1741) as to the claim for the refund of the lease deposit of this case owned by D based on the executory deed No. 614, 2012, which was executed by a notary public against D on March 26, 2013, and the above decision was served on E.
C. Meanwhile, on June 5, 2013, Defendant B loaned KRW 500 million interest at 20% per annum to D, and on July 15, 2013 with the due date, Defendant B drafted a notarial deed of monetary loan agreements No. 394, June 10, 2013 by a notary public on June 10, 2013.
After that, on July 22, 2013, Defendant B received a seizure and collection order (the Jeju District Court 2013TT 4489) regarding the claim for the refund of the lease deposit of this case based on the above notarial deed against D as to the amount claimed in KRW 511,813,531, and the above decision was served in E.
Defendant C, on January 29, 2014, at KRW 200,000,00, such as debtor D, garnishee E, and claim loans, and KRW 48,00,000, such as debtor D, third debtor E, and claim loans, on February 3, 2014, as to the claim for the refund of the lease deposit of this case, each of the Jeju District Court 2014Kahap36, and Jeju District Court.