beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.03.24 2016나62214

반환약정금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the instant case, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for further determination as to the Defendant’s assertion as follows. Thus, this is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant's defense that the defendant agreed to pay KRW 30 million to the plaintiff, even though the contract is not a return agreement, but a criminal trial for the crime of occupational embezzlement committed by the defendant and the plaintiff as an accomplice, and thus, the plaintiff promised to pay for the defendant's crime and thus constitutes a juristic act in violation of good customs and other social order (Article 103 of the Civil Act) and thus, constitutes a juristic act in violation of good customs and other social order (Article 103 of the Civil Act).

B. However, the evidence presented by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant agreed to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million in return for the false confession that the Plaintiff alone committed an occupational embezzlement without conspiracy with the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

In addition, there is no evidence to view that the agreement is a condition to suspend the Plaintiff from maintaining false statements that the Plaintiff reverses the Defendant’s crime on behalf of the Defendant.

Even if some of the motives of the Defendant agreed to return the investment amount on February 15, 2012, “the Plaintiff is required to pay the benefits to the Plaintiff that he would take advantage of the Defendant’s embezzlement,” the Defendant would invest KRW 30 million in each of the 30 million, and operate the c. in the same business by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in the evidence Nos. 2 through 4 and Nos. 2 and 5.