손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
The reasoning of the judgment of this court cited in the judgment of the first instance is as follows. Except for the addition of the judgment on the assertion that the Plaintiff emphasizes or added in the trial, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as follows, and such judgment is cited as it includes summary language pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Part 2, " March 21, 2016" in Part 8 shall be added to " March 31, 2016".
Part 3, " November 1, 2017" in Part 17 shall be applied to " October 29, 2017".
Part 3, "11.28" in Part 18 shall be added to "1.1.1."
The defendant asserted about the main claim of the plaintiff's main claim for additional determination based on the false fact that C has ownership of the right to dispose of stolen fish, even though he was aware that C did not have the right to dispose of stolen fish, thereby aiding and abetting the plaintiff by intention that obstructs the realization of the plaintiff's claim and facilitate C's acquisition of investment money.
In addition, the Defendant had a duty of care to inform the Plaintiff of the absence of disposal authority against C, and even if the instant confirmation document was used in making it difficult or impossible to recover claims by C, aiding and abetting due to negligence in breach of the duty of care for the preparation of the instant confirmation document is established.
The Plaintiff’s confirmation of this case led to the conviction that the instant 1 and 2 joint venture agreement was concluded between C and the Defendant, and it was believed that the repayment of its claim was secured, thereby making it impossible or difficult to collect claims against C, and thus, proximate causation is recognized between the Defendant’s written confirmation of this case and the Plaintiff’s damage.
The judgment of the court of first instance is a third party who did not claim by the parties although the intention of subjective conspiracy is not required for the establishment of joint tort under the civil law.