1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B against the Incheon District Court for claiming the reimbursement amount, etc. (Ycheon District Court Branch 2010 Gohap 6559). On December 7, 2010, the Incheon District Court rendered a judgment that "B shall pay to the plaintiff 203,200,619 won jointly with C, and 203,19,56 won among them, 15% per annum from September 13, 2010 to October 4, 2010, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive on December 31, 2010.

(B) As of September 6, 2018, the Plaintiff’s claim against B based on the above final judgment (hereinafter “instant claim for reimbursement”). As of September 6, 2018, the amount of the claim for reimbursement of the instant claim against B is KRW 394,212,057.

B. B, on June 15, 1999, operated a personal business entity called “D” (hereinafter “instant business entity”), and discontinued the plastic plastic products and gold-type manufacturing business on August 31, 2010.

C. The Defendant is a corporation established on November 22, 2012 with the purpose of manufacturing and wholesale and retail business of mobile phones, and gold-type manufacturing business.

The defendant's representative director E is the children of B and the defendant's inside director C is the spouse of B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 evidence, Eul 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion is an individual company operated by two individuals only in the form of a legal entity, and actually, E or C, the son of B, as a nominal representative director.

B is a bad credit holder, and the defendant is establishing and operating the defendant for the purpose of concealing his property and evading his debts as above, and the defendant's legal personality is punished, and the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff, the creditor of the claim for indemnity of this case, has a legal personality separate from B is based on the principle of good faith.