beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2018.01.18 2015가단11043

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 25, 2014, the Plaintiff was convicted of a crime of fraud (hereinafter “related criminal judgment”) due to the following summary of the crime (hereinafter “instant criminal facts”) in the previous District Court Branch of Jeonju District Court Decision 2014Kadan469 (hereinafter “instant criminal facts”).

Since then, the part against the plaintiff in the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

The defendant's internal rules (Article 56 of the Guidelines for Contract Affairs) shall prepare a written request for purchase of goods to be purchased by the Institute and submit it to the contracting department in charge of the contract to the main source located in Daejeon, the contracting officer in charge of the main source shall select the company, purchase the goods, conduct an examination at the main source, and pay the purchase price if the Institute confirms delivery.

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff and the Defendant researchers received and used the goods personally, and then submitted a false purchase request to the principal source and confirmed delivery, thereby soliciting the Defendant to pay the purchase price for the goods.

Accordingly, from April 4, 2012 to July 31, 2013, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 98,992,00 from the Defendant on six occasions, and acquired the price of the goods by fraud.

B. On July 5, 2017, the judgment, which included the following judgments (hereinafter “previous civil judgment”) was rendered against the Plaintiff et al. by the Daejeon District Court 2015Gahap104156, asserting that the act as described in the above paragraph (a) constituted a tort and claiming damages against the Plaintiff et al., and the part of the judgment against the Plaintiff became final and conclusive.

The criminal facts of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant constitute joint tort under the Civil Act, and even if the goods equivalent to the amount recognized as the amount obtained by deceit in the relevant criminal judgment are supplied to the defendant, the defendant who does not have the obligation to pay the price for the goods claimed.

참조조문