logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.11.28 2018가합113384
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The obligation of promissory notes against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) on the part of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is stated in the separate sheet.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s intra-company director C received the borrowed amount from the Defendant and the wife D as indicated below, and issued a promissory note as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) to the Defendant.

The amount of KRW 17,600,000, which was remitted from the Defendant on June 2, 2017 to KRW 98,00,000,000, which was the amount of KRW 100,000,000 from the Defendant’s issuance of the Promissory Notes No. 1 of this case, and KRW 196,40,000, which was remitted from the Defendant’s wife D on July 4, 2017, total of KRW 196,00,000, which was remitted from the Defendant’s issuance of the Promissory Notes No. 233, Feb. 6, 2018; KRW 90,000,000,000 from the Defendant’s issuance of the Promissory Notes No. 1 of this case; and KRW 86,000,000,000 from the Defendant’s issuance of the Promissory Notes No. 34,4,005,205,00.

B. The Plaintiff filed a complaint with the investigative agency on the charge of occupational breach of trust, etc., and is under investigation.

[Based on recognition] The identification of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Considering the following circumstances, there is no obligation to pay promissory notes based on the Plaintiff’s instant promissory notes against the Defendant.

1) The Promissory Notes No. 1 does not state the issue date, and the Promissory Notes No. 3 and No. 4 of this case state that the due date is earlier than the issue date. Accordingly, the Promissory Notes are invalid due to the lack of the requirements for the Promissory Notes. 2) There is no legal relationship between the original Defendant and the Defendant as to the Promissory Notes No. 1.

C has overall control over the Plaintiff’s technical business division and business management support.

arrow