logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.09.27 2019나2021994
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as shown in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the Plaintiff’s rejection of any further assertion by this court, and thus, the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On March 20, 2017, around June 8, 2017, Nonparty 10-11, two pages 2 to 10-11, after the change of the location, Nonparty 2, from F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), Nonparty 5, 7, and 8, on March 20, 2017, around 17, 2017, Nonparty 21-22, each of the instant real estate, on June 13, 2017, transferred KRW 7/10,00 of each of the instant real estate to Nonparty 1 on March 20, 2017, instead of paying a down payment of KRW 400 million to Nonparty 2,44,00,000,000,000,000 to Nonparty 3, 2017.

I may recognize the fact that the non-party company transferred KRW 400 million to the non-party company on March 20, 2017, and the fact that the non-party company paid KRW 400 million to the defendant on March 17, 2017 under the claim acquisition agreement with the non-party company is as seen earlier.

The judgment of the first instance court is affirmed as follows.

3. The Plaintiff’s assertion in supplement is that: (a) on March 17, 2017, the Defendant entered into a contract to transfer the instant claim to Nonparty Company (K) and paid 400 million won to Nonparty Company via Nonparty Company; and (b) on March 24, 2017, E, a debtor of the instant claim, entered into a contract to sell 7/10 shares of each of the instant real estate to Nonparty Company; and (c) on March 24, 2017, E, a debtor of the instant claim, sells 7/10 shares of each of the instant real estate, and replaced the down payment with KRW 400 million that I paid to the Defendant. Accordingly, E, a debtor of the instant claim, should be deemed to have paid 40

arrow