beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, KRW 109,370,928, and the aforementioned amount from March 11, 2014 to April 10, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. From January 7, 2012 to July 23, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendants, who jointly run wholesale and retail businesses, such as phrases, office supplies, and miscellaneous goods, with the trade name of “Ninios” (formerly amended: Gamins), and supplied the goods worth KRW 708,758,363 in total, but did not receive KRW 109,370,928 in total.
B. On May 9, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 140,00,00,000 (= KRW 109,370,928,928, and KRW 30,629,072, out of KRW 214,421,56, and damage claim KRW 30,629,072 against the Plaintiff’s Defendants, to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff. On May 12, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the assignment of claims on May 12, 2014, and the said notification reached the Defendants around that time.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 3, Byung evidence 1-6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the claims of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstances, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor KRW 109,370,928, and damages for delay.
B. The Defendants’ assertion 1) asserts that the assignment of claims to the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor constitutes a litigation trust and thus null and void. In a case where the assignment of claims is primarily performed, etc., the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, Article 6 of the Trust Act shall be deemed null and void, even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act. Whether it is the principal purpose of litigation shall be determined in light of all the circumstances, including the details and methods of concluding the assignment of claims, the interval between the transfer contract and the lawsuit, and the relationship between the transferor and the transferee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da23412, Mar. 27, 2014).