logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.04.19 2018가단12431
투자금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 200,000,000 as well as 24% per annum from July 1, 2018 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) invested KRW 200,000,000 in the sale project for the new construction project in the Changwon-si E and F ground-based G name G (hereinafter “instant project”); (b) made an agreement with the Plaintiff to return the investment principal first by June 30, 2018; and (c) made an agreement with the Plaintiff by adding the delay damages calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of preparation of the Fund Investment Agreement to the return of the said investment amount, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the said investment amount together with H.

B. On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 200,000,000 to D Co., Ltd., but D Co., Ltd has failed to repay the principal even after June 30, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 and 2-1 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above fact-finding, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with H Co., Ltd. to pay delay damages calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from July 1, 2018 to the date of full payment, as sought by the Plaintiff, as well as from July 1, 2018 to the date of full payment.

The defendant asserts that D's transfer/acquisition agreement was reached on the transfer/acquisition agreement of D's shares to H and I as D's shares are no longer difficult to proceed with the business of this case, and that the due date of the investment was extended by the completion date of the business of this case.

However, according to the fact-finding results of this court's fact-finding on H, it is recognized that the representative director of D and H and I agreed on the instant business rights and stock transfer and takeover, but there is no ground to view that the Plaintiff changed the time of return of the investment amount to D and D.

The defendant is the actual manager of H as the plaintiff's agent, and the plaintiff is also subject to the above acquisition agreement.

arrow