beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 26, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for supply of “Fird Hester” (hereinafter “instant commodity supply contract”) with A Co., Ltd. with its head office in Gangseo-gu Busan (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and supplied part of the goods to the Nonparty Company.
B. On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed on the instant contract for the supply of goods with Nonparty Company, but the Nonparty Company filed an application for mediation with the Subcontract Council of the Korea Fair Trade Mediation Agency on the ground that it did not pay the price for goods, and on April 20, 2015, the conciliation was concluded that the Nonparty Company shall pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 814,439,683 (hereinafter “the price for the goods in this case”) eight times from May 10, 2015 to December 10, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 8 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The representative director C of the non-party company asserted that the plaintiff transferred the core business and the customer of the non-party company, which was already established in order to evade the non-party company's obligation to pay for the goods of this case against the plaintiff.
It is not permissible in light of the principle of trust and good faith to assert that the above two companies are abuse of corporate personality by the method of business transfer. Thus, the plaintiff has the right to seek payment of the price of the goods in this case against the non-party company and the delay damages therefrom in accordance with the legal principle of denial of corporate personality.
B. In the event that an existing company established a new company with a view to evading its obligations, the establishment of the new company has abused the company system in order to achieve the illegal purpose, such as evading its obligations, so the said two companies have a separate legal personality.