beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2017.01.25 2016나53541

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 7. The following shall be added to Chapter 9:

In addition, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s I received an order from the representative director of A to assist the Defendant in selling at a discount, and that J, the buyer of the sales contract, concluded double contracts, etc., the Defendant intentionally delivered the blank sales contract to assist the Defendant in selling at a discount. The Plaintiff’s assertion that, in light of the following circumstances: ① K, which was the Defendant’s former I, received KRW 40,000,00 from the representative director of A, is recognized, but the time was later than July 5, 2011, and ② the above money was not individually delivered to the Defendant, but there is no specific evidence to support the Defendant’s delivery of the above money, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the above portion was insufficient to acknowledge each of the above subparagraphs 1 through 8.

In regard to this, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have been released from the defendant's duty under the instant trust agreement due to the conclusion of the instant loan management agreement, and the defendant still bears the duty of care in trust affairs with respect to the plaintiff, but in violation of this, Gap's act of discounting sale of the instant commercial building, thereby causing damage to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff is liable for compensation.

Doese, contract between the parties.