beta
Text
1. Defendant A and Defendant B jointly and severally agreed on KRW 168,334,90 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff from June 2, 2016 to June 2, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company that was supplied with chemical products, such as methyl ether, by the Plaintiff and sold them in Busan and Yong-Nam area. Defendant B is the representative of the Defendant Company, and Defendant C is the mother of Defendant B.
B. By August 2012, the Plaintiff traded with the Defendant Company, and as of July 15, 2013, the Plaintiff had a claim for the purchase price of KRW 218,334,90 against the Defendant Company.
C. The Plaintiff urged the Defendant Company and the Defendant B to repay the above goods payment liability, on October 28, 2013, Defendant B completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage in the name of the Defendant Company (hereinafter “registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage”) on the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in order to secure the said goods payment liability.
On April 25, 2014, the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund registered provisional attachment (Seoul District Court 2014Kadan50585) on the instant real estate, and completed a provisional attachment registration (Seoul Southern District Court 2014Kahap2099) on May 30, 2014. On June 27, 2014, the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Company, Defendant B, and Plaintiff for a claim for indemnity payment (hereinafter “Seoul District Court 2014Gahap46238,”) against the Plaintiff for a claim for indemnity payment against the Defendant Company, Defendant B, and Defendant B, for reimbursement of reimbursement amount of KRW 687,047,073,073 and delay damages amount of KRW 686,270,650,650 among them, and the Plaintiff claimed against the Plaintiff for the cancellation of the instant contract to establish the mortgage and the cancellation of the instant contract to establish the mortgage on the ground that the instant mortgage was a fraudulent act.
E. On April 24, 2015, when the instant lawsuit for indemnity was pending, the Credit Guarantee Fund and the Plaintiff drafted a written agreement with respect to the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant agreement”) as follows:
The creditor and the plaintiff of the agreement shall be the Credit Guarantee Fund.