logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.04.05 2015가단243278
건물하자보수비등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, the cause of the claim, has a claim for judgment against C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”).

C is merely a company of the defendant, who is the representative director, and thus becomes a dominant position in which the defendant can use C at least in his own mind and abuse the corporation system, so the defendant is obliged to pay the judgment bond like the written claim.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 21, 2011, the Seoul High Court rendered a judgment with respect to C’s claim that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 71,118,037 won and the amount at the rate of 5% per annum from June 11, 2009 to December 21, 2011, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (the main claim), and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

B. C’s personnel composition 1) Promoters: (a) promoters D, B, E, and F prepared the C’s articles of incorporation on May 10, 200; (b) acquired shares; and (c) each director was appointed as a representative director at the time of establishment; (c) retired from the office of representative director on January 20, 2003; and (d) retired from the office of director on September 27, 2005.

3) On January 20, 2003, the defendant was appointed as the representative director and was continuously reappointed. 4) E retired from office on September 27, 2005.

5) The F retired from office on May 10, 2006. 6) G was appointed as an auditor since its establishment and continued to be reappointed.

7) H was appointed as a director on September 27, 2005, and retired from office on March 31, 2012. 8) I continued to be appointed as a director on May 10, 2006.

(c) as of the year 2012, the Defendant owns shares of 40,000 shares (40%) with H 30,000 shares (30%) with I 20,000 shares (20%) and G 10,000 shares (10%).

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the result of the order to submit taxation information to the director of the Namcheon Tax Office, the fact inquiry to the registration office of Incheon District Court, the purport of the whole

3. The F was involved as a promoter, and F, H, and .

arrow