beta
(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2017.12.19 2017가단51612

구상금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,647,048 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from April 20, 2017 to December 19, 2017.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

On December 2009, the Plaintiff and the Defendant established and operated the KGG Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”).

On December 28, 2009, the defendant set up the office of the business of this case in Gangnam-si D and 3 floors of Gangseo-si around December 28, 2009 and started to operate the business of this case.

The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 93.9 million to the Defendant from December 11, 2009 to May 3, 2010 with respect to the establishment and operation of the above enterprise.

On May 2010, the Defendant closed the instant enterprise on the grounds of its poor operation.

Around December 2009, the Defendant demanded E to pay money to enable E to deliver back-to-work uniforms of its employees, and the Plaintiff, at the request of the Defendant, forged the written order for the delivery of back-to-work uniforms under the name of the representative director of the closed-work corporation on March 12, 2010, and sent it to E.

And E paid KRW 33.5 million to the defendant around May 13, 2010.

Since then, E filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking compensation of the said KRW 33.5 million (the District Court Decision 2012Da57033 (hereinafter “relevant civil case”), the above court rendered a judgment on August 14, 2013 on the ground that the Plaintiff participated in the Defendant’s tort and acquired money from E, and that the Plaintiff is obligated to compensate for the said KRW 33.5 million and delay damages.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 40,808,811 in total to E in accordance with the above judgment.

On December 23, 2016, the Defendant deposited KRW 45 million in the name of the Plaintiff.

On April 27, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly acquired KRW 33,50,000 from E and acquired KRW 139,820,00 by the Defendant alone (the District Court Decision 2016Da4813 case; hereinafter referred to as “relevant criminal case”), and the above court rendered a judgment convicting the Plaintiff and the Defendant of all criminal facts.

(based on recognition) facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, 4, 12 (including each number).