beta
Text
1. Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 373,340,00 and its amount from July 1, 2016 to June 26, 2017.
Reasons
1. As to the claim against the Defendant Company A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) around March 31, 2016, the Defendant Company (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) requested the Plaintiff to supply the same software as the attached Form in relation to “C” to KRW 373,340,00 (including value-added tax) for the service cost. The Plaintiff’s supply of all the software under the above order form to the Defendant Company around June 2016 does not conflict between the parties, or is recognized by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to each of the items listed in subparagraphs 1 through 3.
According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 373,340,000 for software supply services and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum from July 1, 2016 to June 26, 2017, which is the day when the instant complaint was served on the Defendant Company, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.
2. As to the claim against the defendant B
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a small-scale company with capital of 10,000,000 won, and D, a family member of Defendant B, an internal director, is an auditor.
This constitutes abuse of corporate personality in violation of the principle of trust and good faith as a means to avoid the application of the law on Defendant B, which is merely an individual company behind the corporate personality in substance, although it has the external form of a juristic person, in substance, it constitutes abuse of corporate personality in violation of the principle of trust and good faith. Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to pay the price under the instant order to the Plaintiff in accordance with
B. The Plaintiff’s statement No. 4 and the circumstances required by the Plaintiff alone were punished to the extent that the Defendant Company was not only an individual company of Defendant B at the time of ordering the Plaintiff’s software services.
or the defendant B establishes the defendant corporation for the purpose of abusing the corporation system.