logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.09.12 2017가단503918
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s loan 1) B applied for a loan to the Plaintiff during the course of operating the “D oriental medical hospital” at the Gwangju Mine-gu Seoul Building. (2) On May 10, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement (hereinafter “credit transaction agreement”) between B and B on the terms of credit transaction (hereinafter “credit transaction agreement”) between B and B on the terms of “300,000,000 won for credit extension,” and on May 10, 2016, the term of validity of the credit extension; (3) May 10, 2017; (4) 8% per annum; and (5) interest rate per annum if the overdue period is less than three months, 11% per annum if the overdue period is less than three months, and 6 months, 12% per annum if the overdue period is less than six months, and thereafter, 30,000,000 won per annum.

3) Since then, the Plaintiff received KRW 15,00,000 from B, and changed the name of hospital to “Fvalescent hospital” after transferring the location of the instant oriental medical hospital between the Defendant and the Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju, the name of hospital was changed to “Fvalescent hospital” on October 15, 2016. (b) B and the Defendant transferred the location of the instant oriental medical hospital as of August 2016.

(2) On October 18, 2016, the Defendant entered into a contract with B to take over all facilities and equipment, human resources, hospitalized patients, equipment, and medicines supplied within the instant hospital. After completing the registration of the representative of the instant hospital, the instant hospital is operating the instant hospital until now. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute over the instant hospital; Party A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Party B’s evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including each number, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

2. The plaintiff's assertion constitutes a business takeover using the trade name of the instant hospital operated by B, and thus, it constitutes a business takeover agreement of B, a business transferor, under Article 42 (1) of the Commercial Act.

arrow