청구이의
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Facts of recognition
The Plaintiff worked as marketing director at the Defendant Company from December 22, 2014 to June 10, 2016.
In fact, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with Samsung Industries for the supply of the same boxes and VDBG. However, around May 2015, the Plaintiff concluded that the Defendant Company’s ex-factory employee agreed to deliver Samsung Industries with the same boxes and VDG equivalent to KRW 114,025,923, and that it would be shipped out, and that it would have caused the Defendant Company’s ex-factory employee to release the product equivalent to the above money, and sold it to Samsung.
When the Plaintiff’s tort was discovered, on June 10, 2016, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of commitment to recognize the Plaintiff’s mistake on his/her own, and compensate for damages up to June 14, 2016, KRW 1100 million as damages, and to provide the lease contract for the apartment at his/her residence as security, and issued it to the Defendant company.
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff received a request from the customer for the purchase of goods equivalent to KRW 10 million and KRW 62,60,000 from the Defendant Company, and had the Defendant Company produce goods equivalent to the above money, and sold the said goods to the Defendant Company without knowledge. The price of goods received was arbitrarily used for personal purposes.
On June 11, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) recognized all of the aforementioned illegal acts on June 11, 2016, and prepared a letter of intent to pay the above embezzled money to the Defendant Company by the 30th day of the same month (including each letter drawn up in relation to the illegal acts in the above paragraph (b) and delivered it to the Defendant Company.
On April 28, 2016, Defendant Company filed an application with the Plaintiff for the payment order against the Plaintiff, seeking a total of KRW 186,66 million damages based on each of the instant notes, as Suwon District Court 2016j1233 (hereinafter “instant payment order”), and the Plaintiff did not raise any objection.