손해배상(기)
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the evidence additionally submitted in the court of first instance, which is insufficient to acknowledge the defendant's assertion; and (b) the part concerning the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the following determination as to the defendant's assertion as to the supplementary or additional assertion in the court of first instance; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. The defendant's liability for damages 1) The defendant did not know at all the plaintiff's internal settlement process and could not be known. The defendant did not know the previous process of internal settlement of funds, and there was only the plaintiff's actual transaction company among the nominal holders of the account who remitted the virtual sales price upon C's request. Thus, the defendant is not liable for aiding and abetting the defendant's transfer of the money transferred to the defendant's account to the borrowed name account at C's request. Since C's crime of breach of trust has already been completed "the net time when the corporation's funds are leaked to the outside by remitting the money to the defendant's account," the defendant again remitted the above money to the borrowed name account, and therefore, the defendant's act cannot be deemed to have caused damage to the plaintiff or to have been expanded due to the defendant's act. 2) The aiding and abetting in joint tort refers to all direct and indirect acts that facilitate the tort, and thus, it is in violation of the duty of care and abetting the tort as a matter of principle, unlike the Criminal Act.
Supreme Court Decision 201 April 1, 2014
0. Declaration.