logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.12.22 2016가합200589
약정금 반환의 소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs clothes, clothing, wholesale and retail business, etc., and the Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells clothing and miscellaneous goods, wholesale and retail business, and export and import business.

B. On December 30, 2013, A was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures by Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Rehabilitation Court) 2013 Mahap262, and C, a representative director of A, was deemed a legal manager of A on the same day.

According to the decision on commencement of the above rehabilitation procedure, A’s legal administrator is required to obtain permission from the above court in order to make “the conclusion of a loan contract for consumption in which expenditure is expected to be more than ten million won, and any borrowed loan in whatever name or method is.”

C. On September 1, 2014, the Plaintiff loaned USD 200,000 in total by paying USD 100,000 on September 2, 2014 and USD 100,000 on October 7, 2014 to A for the purpose of subsidizing foreign business funds (hereinafter “instant contract”). A entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to repay the said money to the Plaintiff on May 30, 2015 and December 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C signed the instant contract on behalf of A, and affixed the seal “A’s legal administrator C” to the instant contract.

However, C did not obtain the permission of the court on the conclusion of the instant contract.

E. A was determined to discontinue the rehabilitation procedures on March 15, 2016, and was declared bankrupt on March 30, 2016 by Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Rehabilitation Court) 2016Hahap35, and the Defendant was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy on March 30, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that USD 200,000 was lent to A according to the instant contract.

Therefore, the defendant's loan amount to the plaintiff 200,000 US dollars: Provided, That as substitute payment for this, the plaintiff is paid in Korean won according to the exchange rate at the time of the closing of argument.

arrow