beta
Text
1. Defendant A’s 6% per annum from April 2, 2013 to January 7, 2015 with respect to KRW 44,691,202 and the said money to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. As to the claim against Defendant A, the Plaintiff was a corporation that engages in steel wholesale business, and entered into a steel materials supply contract with the Defendant A, who actually runs the steel structure manufacturing business, etc. (hereinafter “D”), under which the Plaintiff agreed to approve the payment for the first day of August 2012 with the Defendant A to pay in cash as of the end of the next month. The Plaintiff supplied the amount of KRW 74,958,345 to D from September 11, 2012 to November 13, 2012, but the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 44,691,202 out of which was supplied to the Plaintiff, and the fact that Defendant A agreed to pay the payment for the said goods to the Plaintiff on March 6, 2013 does not conflict between the parties, or that the payment for the goods was concluded on March 1, 2013 as a whole, may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of each of the entries in subparagraphs 1 through 4, and 7 (Ga number).
Thus, Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 4,691,202 won in the balance of the goods price and 20% interest per annum under the Commercial Act from April 2, 2013 to January 7, 2015, and 20% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B and C
A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion is unclear the cause of claim against Defendant B and C, Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages caused by the tort, since it was committed a tort that facilitates Defendant A’s act of evading obligations against the Plaintiff by lending his name to Defendant A, which was the representative director of D and C, and thus, Defendant C is also a corporation established to avoid the Plaintiff’s obligations against the Plaintiff, and thus, Defendant C is also liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages caused by the tort.
B. The written evidence Nos. 5 and 6 alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s above assertion against Defendant B and C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is justified.