logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.06.13 2018가단9988
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 102,296,133 as well as 24% per annum from November 30, 2018 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) had its head office in Ulsan-gu D and E as a company established for the purpose of industrial plant construction business, etc. on July 26, 2017. Around November 2, 2017, the head office was changed to Ulsan-gu F and three floors, and the representative director is G.

B. On July 12, 2018, the Plaintiff, C, and G commissioned a notary public H on July 12, 2018 to prepare a notarial deed under a quasi-loan agreement with the purport that “C and C, a joint and several surety, jointly and severally, shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 102,296,133,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

(hereinafter referred to as “instant authentic deed”). C.

On the other hand, at around April 19, 2018, C leased deposit money of KRW 3,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000 from the J to August 22, 2018 (temporary payment of the rent of KRW 4 months) to set up “C” at the said warehouse. D.

On July 18, 2018, the Defendant: (a) was established for the purpose of mechanical facility construction business, etc.; (b) the warehouse of this case is the location of the Defendant; (c) G, the representative director of C, was appointed as the Defendant’s representative director; and L was appointed as one of the inside directors of the Defendant and C around July 18, 2018.

E. On July 23, 2018, the Defendant leased the instant warehouse from J as KRW 3,00,000 from August 23, 2018 to April 22, 2019, the lease deposit was set at KRW 1,500,000 from August 23, 2018, but the Defendant did not pay the lease deposit to J separately, and from August 24, 2018, paid the rent and value-added tax of the instant warehouse to J.

F. On October 19, 2018, the Plaintiff owned C-owned goods located in the warehouse of this case based on the notarial deed of this case.

arrow