logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2012.10.11 2012나4909
채무부존재확인
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The basic facts

On August 24, 2005, the Plaintiff and Busan Savings Bank concluded a loan agreement with the interest rate of 11% per annum, and on August 24, 2010 (the extension after the due date), and ② on May 19, 2008, the loan agreement with the interest rate of 17.5 million won per annum and the due date of payment on May 19, 201 (the extension after the due date) respectively, and the Busan Savings Bank deposited each of the above loans in the account in the name of the Plaintiff on the date of the above loan.

B. On May 25, 2011, Busan Savings Bank sent a notice to the Plaintiff demanding each of the above loans of KRW 141,284,532 in total, and KRW 19,390,112 in total, with respect to the above loans, and KRW 19,390,112 in total, and around that time, the above notice reached the Plaintiff.

C. On August 16, 2012, Busan District Court declared bankruptcy against the Busan Savings Bank (2012Hahap4), appointed the Defendant as the trustee in bankruptcy of the company.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and Eul evidence 6 (including branch numbers, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) Each of the above loans contract is invalid as it is concluded based on a false agreement with the plaintiff and Busan Savings Bank. Thus, there is no obligation under each of the above loans contract against the plaintiff's Busan Savings Bank. In addition, each of the above loans was used as the purchase fund for the shares held by the Busan Savings Bank. On the other hand, the Busan Savings Bank actively asserted the rights to the above shares and demanded the plaintiff to repay each of the above loans against the plaintiff is contrary to the good faith principle. 2) The defendant alleged that the Busan Savings Bank was a bona fide third party under Article 108 (2) of the Civil Act on the ground that the Busan Savings Bank was declared bankrupt and was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy of the above company. However, in order to constitute a bona fide third party under Article 108 (2) of the Civil Act

arrow