logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.26 2017가단105621
대여금 및 보증채무금
Text

1. The Defendant’s interest rate of KRW 5,512,569,117 and KRW 4,785,681,721 among the Plaintiff shall be from January 18, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Defendant, a company engaged in trade business, etc., but actually operated B, and registered as C and each of the representative directors.

(2) Of the Defendant’s representative directors, one of the representative directors of B and D, B’s friendship E, and F (hereinafter “F”), the representative director of H (H; hereinafter “H”) in Singapore, and the representative director of H (hereinafter “H”) in Singapore, etc., the L/C was opened by pretending that the F would export an antibiotic substance equivalent to USD 2,00 per ton produced at H to USD 100,000,000, by selling the bills of exchange for export to the bank, and by using this, the L/C was established.

(3) Accordingly, on June 30, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with F to supply goods to be supplied with 200,000 won per kg, and entered into a contract with H to export goods again at USD 1.5 million and USD 3 million, respectively.

On August 18, 2015, H issued the credit of USD 1500,000 and the credit of USD 3 million on November 12, 2015, respectively, to which the defendant was named as the beneficiary from the LEUMI US (hereinafter "LEUI") located in the United States on the basis of the above export contract, etc.

(4) After August 2015, B asked the foreign exchange bank, our bank, etc. to determine whether to purchase an export bill based on each of the above L/C, and subsequently rejected, B delegated the Defendant’s director to D with the business of selling each of the above export bill. On August 31, 2015, B resigned the Defendant’s representative director.

(5) At around October 2015, D asked K from the J branch staff of the Plaintiff Bank about whether it is possible to purchase each export bill above, but sought the answer that it is impossible for the Defendant to purchase the above export bill due to the Defendant’s poor financial standing. At that time, D conspired with K to prepare a false non-disclosure certificate, etc., and passed corporate credit assessment by deceiving L by deceiving the head of the above branch.

Accordingly, on November 19, 2015, the plaintiff between the plaintiff and the defendant on November 19, 2015 claims for export price from the defendant.

arrow