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

A. The Plaintiff is a company established around April 2002 for the purpose of the business of manufacturing asphalt, etc., and the Defendant was registered in the certified transcript of corporate register with the Plaintiff’s representative director, company director, director, etc. from the Haman on December 2007 to May 2015.

B. According to the Plaintiff’s Customer Director, as of May 31, 2015, KRW 684,092,627 is included in the provisional payment against the Defendant as of May 31, 2015.

C. On October 31, 2014, the Plaintiff’s Daegu Bank Account (C, D, E) details and the Defendant’s Daegu Bank Account (F, G) details were compared, and there was a continuous deposit and withdrawal transaction between the said accounts until October 31, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-3, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, and 3, the result of the financial transaction information reply to Daegu Bank

2. Plaintiff’s claim, etc. and determination thereof

A. (1) According to the Plaintiff’s claim and the Plaintiff’s Customer Director, the Defendant borrowed KRW 684,092,627 from the Plaintiff in the form of provisional payment by transferring money from the Plaintiff’s account to the Defendant’s account. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 684,092,627 and delay damages.

(2) Even if H used an account under the name of the Defendant, the Defendant is liable for damages under Article 399(1) of the Commercial Act, since H knew or could have known that H used the account in the name of the Defendant to arbitrarily withdraw the Plaintiff’s funds, it was allowing H to use such account.

B. The judgment of this court is based on the following facts and circumstances, namely, ① the Plaintiff embezzled the total amount of KRW 684,092,627 by using the money that the Defendant kept on duty for the Plaintiff for personal purpose, and embezzled the total amount of KRW 684,092,627 by using it for personal purpose.”