beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1 as to the establishment and validity of the repayment agreement
A. Even if an act exceeds the scope of the representative director’s power of representation, if that act falls within the scope of the company’s capacity, a third party who is unaware of the restriction on the power of representation must be protected. The representative director’s act within the scope of the company’s power of representation shall be valid as an act of the company even if the representative director abusess his/her authority for the purpose of pursuing his/her own or a third party’s interest, regardless of the company’s profit.
However, if the other party to the act knew or could have known the intention of the representative director, the act shall be null and void against the company (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Da34045, Mar. 26, 2004; 2005Da3649, Jul. 28, 2005). Furthermore, the court shall determine whether the allegation of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules based on the ideology of social justice and equity by free evaluation of evidence, by taking into account the overall purport of pleadings and the result of examination of evidence (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act). The judgment of the court below did not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and thus, the facts duly established
(Article 432 of the same Act). (b)
On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, agreed that (1) the Plaintiff and B (hereinafter “B”) paid the sales price for the instant art product to D, etc., and thus, deemed the Plaintiff to have repaid the Plaintiff’s loan and general fund loan obligations (hereinafter “loan obligations”) with respect to the Mump passbook loan and general fund loan obligations (hereinafter “loan obligations”).
The above purchase price is D, etc. with the Plaintiff’s intent to repay the instant loan obligations.