logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.09.18 2018가단221366
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The status of the party concerned is a company aimed at the recruitment, operation, insurance business, insurance agency business, etc. of call center, and D is its actual operator, and the defendant is the head of the plaintiff's headquarters.

B. (1) On April 2017, when the Plaintiff was running the call center operation business of a mutual aid company, D, the actual representative of the Plaintiff, together with the Defendant, was operating the insurance agency business, to set up a branch of E, a corporation operating the insurance agency business.

(2) On June 2017, E branch offices began to conduct business after opening in June 2017, and the Defendant became the branch offices of E Co., Ltd. A.

(3) Around June 2017, the Defendant agreed to use the insurance commission that received by the Defendant’s insurance contract performance under the name of the Defendant for operating funds of the said branch. Around June 2017, the Defendant received the insurance commission from the E Co., Ltd. on July 27, 2017, by setting up the insurance contract performance under the Defendant’s name and receiving KRW 35,657,000.

C. A branch business of E, Inc. was suspended only once a month after the preparation of the authentic deed of promissory notes in the Plaintiff’s name, etc., and the Defendant was forced to recover the above insurance fees received from E, and requested D to return them.

(2) On September 19, 2017, D had the Plaintiff Company’s seal impression and actually carried out the Plaintiff Company’s business. On the same day, D issued, respectively, promissory notes with the Plaintiff and the Defendant as “amounting to KRW 36.6 million,” and “payment at sight.” At the notary office’s office, a notary public, delayed the payment of the said promissory notes as to the said promissory notes under No. 616, pursuant to the Defendant’s commission from the Plaintiff Company’s agent, the said promissory notes with the intent to recognize that there was no objection even if they were immediately subject to compulsory execution (hereinafter “notarial deeds of this case”).

D Payment Arrangement D shall be dated 2017.

arrow