Text
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. Upon C’s request that was the actual representative of the Defendant alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 25,200,000 to the Defendant, KRW 8,000,000 to D, KRW 16,000,00 to E, and KRW 21,00,00 to F. The Plaintiff acquired each of the above loans to D and E, and subrogated the Defendant to F for the said loans.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above loan, acceptance money, and reimbursement amount due to subrogation. Since the Defendant repaid the Plaintiff KRW 32,000,000 to E, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 6,500,000 (= KRW 25,200,000, KRW 8,0000, KRW 16,000,000 - KRW 32,000,000 - KRW 6,50,000,000) and damages for delay.
Even if C does not have the authority to represent or act on behalf of the defendant, C acquired the defendant company as the representative director G with G, and thereafter performed the external duties as the defendant's actual representative, and the defendant impliedly accepted it, so the defendant has the obligation to pay the above loan, etc. to the plaintiff in accordance with the legal principles of expression representation under the Commercial Act or civil law.
In addition, even if the defendant does not bear the responsibility of the representative director or the expression agent, the defendant is obliged to pay the above loan, etc. to the plaintiff according to the liability of the nominal name holder under the Commercial Act, since C permits the defendant to run his business using the name
B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff, D, E, and F, that C made a monetary transaction in his personal capacity, that C used the name of the defendant or did not indicate himself as the representative or agent of the defendant, that C is carrying on a business lending only the name of the defendant, and that the plaintiff was aware or was unaware of the fact that C was not entitled to represent or represent the defendant in the said monetary transaction.