beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.09.20 2011나58178

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The appeal by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) expanded or added at the trial.

Reasons

1. The reasons stated in this part of the basic facts are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for those cases where the Act on the Capital President and the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital President and the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act”) in Section 2, Section 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance provides for the reasons why the judgment is based.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant violated the duty to protect investors (a) on the occurrence of liability for damages (a) the Defendant breached the duty to protect investors by entering the investment prospectus and its management proposal provided to the Plaintiff as it stated otherwise as if the construction was responsible for completing the entire development project of this case, and thereby obstructing the risk accompanied by the fund of this case or the formation of accurate awareness of the content of the investment.

B. (i) Violation of the fiduciary duty in fund management, the instant investment prospectus and management proposal that did not impose the fiduciary duty on the contractor (i.e., negligence that did not impose the fiduciary duty on the contractor) stated that the contractor imposes the fiduciary duty on the contractor and the joint and several liability for the principal and interest of the loan when the completion of the project is not made. As such, the Defendant bears the fiduciary duty on the KIG in creating the instant fund.

Nevertheless, this case’s loan agreement was concluded with the content that sets up the obligation of completing the limited meaning as seen earlier to the Hansan Construction, which eventually led to an event of non-construction of the shopping center, and thus, it was impossible for Hanhan Construction to assume the responsibility of joint and several sureties liability.

Dor. Dor.