beta
Text
1. The lease transfer contract between the Defendant and B on November 20, 2013 between the Defendant and the Defendant is KRW 94,052,00.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The Plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of wholesale and retail business, etc., and the oil price that was not supplied to Nonparty B until June 30, 2013 is a total of KRW 94,052,00 (including surtax).
B leased a building listed in the attached Form C from C from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2012, from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2012, and operated a gas station under the trade name “F stations” (hereinafter “instant gas station”) at the same place, and reduced the rent by KRW 5,00,000 per month when concluding a renewal contract to extend the period.
On November 20, 2013, G on behalf of the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with C to lease the instant gas station by setting the lease deposit of KRW 130 million with respect to the instant gas station, the period from November 26, 2013 to November 25, 2015, and the monthly rent of KRW 6.6 million (including additional tax).
[Reasons for Recognition] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence, and the fact-finding results and the whole purport of the pleadings by the court of this case, which is insolvent B's establishment of fraudulent act, the purport of the whole pleadings, it is recognized that Eul was in excess of its obligation, such as delinquency in payment of KRW 535,349,790 in relation to the operation of gas stations at the time of the lease contract
According to the testimony and the purport of the entire argument by the witness H of fraudulent act, while introducing B with his husband H, there still remains the lease period of B, but he requested that B succeed to B’s lease in the name of the defendant who is the wife of G, and H, who is entitled to enter into a lease contract of the instant gas station on behalf of C, entered into a lease contract with G on behalf of the defendant as to the instant gas station with the same lease deposit with the consent of the above lease succession. In the process, H did not receive the lease deposit from the defendant or return the lease deposit to B.