logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2016.07.21 2015가단40702
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the purchase price claim against C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) with the Changwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Decision 2014Gahap606, and the conciliation was concluded that “Nonindicted Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff in installments six times in six installments.”

B. As to the claim for investment amounting to KRW 530,00,000, which the Defendant had against D Co., Ltd., the Defendant prepared a notarial deed of debt repayment contract No. 664 of 2012, which was prepared by Nonparty Co., Ltd. as joint and several sureties, as a notary public E. Based on the above notarial deed, the Defendant applied for a joint and several auction on the non-party Co., Ltd. F and 24 parcels owned by the non-party Co., Ltd., and received dividends in KRW 12,08,446 on October 26, 2015.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff did not participate in the distribution procedure because it did not demand a distribution in the above auction procedure, even though it was a creditor in need of demand for distribution.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the non-party company's conclusion of the above joint and several surety contract was made by the non-party company as a representative director of the non-party company and D company without the approval of the board of directors of the non-party company, and thus null and void as it constitutes an act of self-transaction of directors or an act of breach of trust against the non-party company. Thus, the non-party company's debt against the non-party company based on the above notarial deed did not exist. Thus, the defendant asserts that the non-party company has a duty to return the dividend

3. Determination

(a) Any creditor demanding a distribution, who is required to demand a distribution, shall be naturally registered prior to the entry into force of the seizure, such as a creditor of provisional seizure, a mortgagee extinguished by a successful bid, and a person having a right to lease on a deposit basis,

arrow