logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2021.03.18 2019가합14211
매매대금반환
Text

The defendant shall pay 1,50,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 24% per annum from December 31, 2018 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On September 13, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the acquisition of convertible bonds and loan bonds (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”). The Plaintiff’s transferee: The Plaintiff’s transferee: KRW 3.5 billion for the converted bonds (hereinafter “instant converted bonds”) issued by D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) owned by the Plaintiff; KRW 4.5 billion for the instant converted bonds; KRW 4.5 billion for the instant converted bonds; and KRW 1.5 billion for the loan bonds; KRW 1.5 billion for the instant converted bonds; and KRW 1.95 billion for the instant loan bonds.

The plaintiff and the defendant shall also enter into a contract for the sale subject to acquisition as follows:

The Defendant, on March 2018, agreed that KRW 5 billion, which was remitted to the Plaintiff as sales deposit for the instant converted bonds and the instant loan claims, shall be converted to the purchase price at the same time as this Agreement was concluded.

The sales price for the above trading shall be KRW 6.5 billion and the balance of KRW 1.5 billion shall be repaid until December 30, 2018.

If the transferee fails to pay the balance of 1.5 billion won on the date of the balance, he/she shall pay interest on 24% per annum on the date of the full payment.

2) The Plaintiff transferred the instant converted bonds and the instant loans to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground for recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence No. 2 (the defendant asserts that he/she did not know the fact that he/she prepared Gap evidence No. 2, and denies the establishment of the petition. However, according to the appraiser E's appraisal result, the defendant's seal affixed on Gap evidence No. 2 is recognized as identical to the defendant's seal on the defendant's seal imprint registration statement.

If a seal affixed to a document is printed out by his/her seal affixed to the document, barring special circumstances, it shall be presumed that the authenticity of the document is established, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person in whose name the document is prepared, and once the authenticity of the seal is presumed to be established, the civil litigation

arrow