beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. (1) After acquiring the Defendant Company’s stocks from the Defendant Company’s representative director, the Plaintiff was in office as a new representative director of the Defendant Company from January 16, 2015. During that process, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 25 million to D who was a de facto manager of the Defendant Company on July 27, 2014, and KRW 168 million in total to the Defendant Company once between January 15, 2015 and July 31, 2015.
(2) Subsequent to May 23, 2016, the Plaintiff retired from office on May 23, 2016, and received reimbursement of KRW 148 million out of the above loans from the Defendant Company.
(3) Therefore, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining loans of KRW 45 million and damages for delay.
B. As to the Defendant, the Defendant asserted that, among the loans between January 15, 2015 and July 31, 2015, the total amount of KRW 168,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won was paid to C, the representative director of the Defendant Company, as the purchase price of shares, etc., and thus, cannot be deemed as the Defendant Company’s obligation against the Plaintiff.
2. Examining whether a dispute over the cause of payment between the original defendant and the defendant was a loan to the plaintiff's defendant company on January 15, 2015, when the plaintiff transferred KRW 45 million to C on January 14, 2015, and apart from the fact that the plaintiff transferred KRW 45 million to the account in the name of the defendant company on January 15, 2015, although there is no dispute between the original defendant and the defendant, it can be known that the statement in the evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 3, and the whole purport of the pleading in the witness D's testimony were added to the whole purport of the pleading. In other words, the above KRW 45 million transferred from the plaintiff to the account in the name of the defendant company was immediately remitted to C, ② there is no obligation to manage the defendant company as at the time of transfer, and ③ Notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff acquired the money by transfer from the defendant company, the plaintiff was requested to pay the money of the defendant company.