logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2015.04.10 2014나301
물품대금
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in oil sales business, etc. under the trade name of “E gas station,” and Defendant B limited partnership company (i.e., “F limited partnership company” before the change; hereinafter “Defendant company”) is a company engaging in construction business.

B. On September 27, 200, Defendant C registered as a general partner and a representative member of Defendant C’s company on April 25, 2006, resigned from the representative member on April 27, 2006, and completed the registration on April 27, 2006. On September 11, 2009, Defendant C re-registered as a general partner of Defendant C’s company and changed its liability to a limited partner on May 10, 201, and completed its registration on May 11, 2010.

C. Defendant D, as the spouse of Defendant C, was registered as a limited partner of the Defendant Company on September 27, 2000. On April 27, 2006, the liability was changed and registered as a general partner on April 27, 2006, and the liability was changed to a limited partner on September 11, 2009.

On May 10, 2010, Defendant D transferred all shares to I, a representative member of Defendant D Company, and withdrawn from Defendant D Company, and completed the registration on May 11, 2010.

Meanwhile, from March 2, 2002, Defendant C was the representative director of G Co., Ltd (hereinafter “G”) who is engaged in the business of gathering earth, sand, and rock from March 2, 2002. G was dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act on December 2, 2007, and the registration of dissolution was completed on December 24, 2007.

[Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 2 and Eul's evidence 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant company

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the written evidence Nos. 1 and 5 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim No. 1 and 5 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) as to the Plaintiff’s provision of oil equivalent to KRW 124,597,440 to the Defendant Company from 2004 to 2005 upon Defendant C’s request, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay KRW 124,597,440 to the Plaintiff.

arrow