logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.07 2014고단6944
강제집행면탈
Text

Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

Reasons

1. Defendant A is the former representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) and H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”). G and H hold approximately 100% shares of Defendant A’s pro-friendly type of shares, and in fact, Defendant A is an individual company. Defendant B is the chief secretary of J’s deputy office (general secretary), and Defendant C is the chief secretary of J’s deputy office.

G Around 2008, K, a creditor of G, filed a lawsuit claiming the return of loans of KRW 3 billion against G, and received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of G around June 2009, and conducted compulsory execution on movable property and securities, etc. in the treasury of G office with the above final and conclusive judgment as executive title, but only the repayment of small amount of claims was made.

Accordingly, around August 2009, G and Defendant A agreed with K, the debt amount of G to K is KRW 3.9 billion in total with the principal and interest amount, KRW 200 million in installments in six months with respect to the above debt amount, and Defendant A jointly and severally guaranteed the above debt amount. Since G paid a sum of KRW 800 million to K four times in total, but G did not repay the remainder of the debt amount, at around October 201, the debt amount of K reaches KRW 3.1 billion in total.

On the other hand, around December 15, 2009, G deposited KRW 1 billion in the bank account in the name of L, a company specializing in Internet video lectures (hereinafter “L”) at the time of entering the bank account in the name of G on December 15, 2009, and upon deposit of KRW 1 billion in the bank account in the name of L, a company specializing in Internet video lectures (hereinafter “L”), G acquired the loan claim for L in the amount of KRW 1 billion. At that time, G borrowed the name of M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) and entered into a borrowed loan agreement with its creditor. Accordingly, G held the loan claim for L in the name of M as the borrowed name of M around October 201.

Defendants, in the situation that G around October 201, around 201, is unable to repay the remaining debt to K, in collusion with the aim of evading further compulsory execution against G and Defendant A.

arrow