beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. 1) From September 8, 2006 to January 22, 2010, the Defendant lent KRW 458,230,797 to the Dong E (Death, October 2, 2014). On April 9, 2010, the Defendant lent KRW 458,230,797 to the Dong E (G). On April 9, 2010, “G” business place located in the Mine-si F for the guarantee of the above loan from E (hereinafter “G”).
(2) Article 2 of the Act provides that “The transfer of the movable property of this case shall be made to the Defendant, and the payment shall be offset by KRW 458,230,797 for the acquisition of the movable property of this case.” Article 3 of the Act provides that “The payment shall be offset by KRW 458,230,797 for the foregoing loan shall be made to the Defendant.” Article 3 of the Act provides that “E may pay the loan in installments for five years, and if the Defendant fails to pay in installments, it may sell the movable property of this case, and if the proceeds from the sale of the movable property of this case fall short of the above loan, the remaining amount may be legally claimed. 2) The notary public and the Defendant E
(hereinafter referred to as “the first certificate of this case”). B.
1) However, E is a corporation I (hereinafter “I”) operated by H.
On March 1, 2011, the Defendant would be assigned the instant movable property again from the Defendant at the ratio of 1/2 shares, and the following special agreements were made. Conditions for transfer: I and E will take over at the ratio of 50:50 for the purpose of normalization of the company (G), and H will not claim the amount specified in the instant first certificate to E who is the same assignee. 2) Defendant, E, and I, also with respect to the said transfer agreement, the notary public drafted a letter as 1250 of the 2011 certificate as 1250.
(hereinafter referred to as “the second certificate of this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s 1, 2, 18, 20, 47 evidence, Eul’s 16 evidence, witness J’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. The Plaintiff, such as the request for extradition of the instant movable property, was the first and second instances of this case.