beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.01.19 2015가합24168

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Nonparty C, who runs the printing business to the Plaintiff, would have the right to collect 40 tons of the strike from the Plaintiff each month while operating the printing business in order to purchase the second class printing machines to the Defendant, the Defendant borrowed a total of KRW 250 million from the Plaintiff around April 2012.

However, the money used by the Defendant to purchase the printing machines (hereinafter “the instant printing machines”) from the Dongyang L&PPP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dongyang L&P”), is limited to KRW 50 million, and the Defendant used the remainder of KRW 200 million for the printing business funds of KRW C.

In addition, the discontinuance that C supplied to the Plaintiff was much less than 40 tons.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff 250 million won and damages for delay due to the concealment of the true usage and deception of the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion concluded a strike supply contract with C in accordance with the Defendant’s good offices, and paid KRW 250 million as a security deposit. Since C was a bad credit holder, the Defendant received a security deposit on behalf of C.

Upon C’s request, the Defendant: (a) purchased the instant printed machines in his name in the same amount of KRW 15 million; and (b) drafted a sales contract with the purchase price of KRW 50 million including value-added tax.

In addition, according to C’s instructions, the Defendant used the remaining money as C’s printing business funds such as the lease deposit of a printing plant.

Therefore, the Defendant arranged a strike supply contract between the Plaintiff and C, and the Plaintiff stored KRW 250 million paid by the Plaintiff as a security deposit for the right to purchase the printed machines of this case for C, and used the money according to C’s instructions. Therefore, the Defendant did not deceiving the Plaintiff and defraud the said money.

2. Determination: