logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.08.29 2018가단203823
양수금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 52,674,693 as well as KRW 52,288,398 as to the plaintiff. From November 20, 2006 to May 26, 2007.

Reasons

1. The Korea Technology Finance Corporation (Korea Technology Finance Corporation prior to the amendment: the trade name prior to the amendment) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, etc. with Jeju District Court 2007Da742. On November 7, 2007, the above court rendered a ruling that "the Defendant, etc. jointly and severally rendered a decision that "the Defendant, etc. shall jointly and severally pay to the non-party Fund the amount of 86,316,064 won and the amount of 85,929,769 won and the amount of 15% per annum from November 20, 206 to May 26, 2007, and the amount of 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. The above ruling became final and conclusive on December 23, 2007, the Korea Technology Finance Corporation notified the Defendant of the claim for indemnity on September 25, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as "the claim of this case") as the parties to the lawsuit.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff who acquired the bonds of this case the amount of 52,674,693 won, 52,288,398 won and 15% per annum from November 20, 2006 to May 26, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. The defendant's assertion that he/she cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim, on September 13, 2006, because he/she is a corporation that does not exist due to dissolution by the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders on September 13, 2006, and the representative liquidator B is granted immunity.

However, even if a company is deemed to have been dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2 of the Commercial Act and the liquidation thereof has been terminated, if there is still a legal relationship and it is necessary to adjust it in reality, it shall not be completely extinguished within the scope of the above (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da7607, May 27, 1994). As long as the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the transfer money of this case against the defendant, the legal relationship to be adjusted remains, and

arrow