손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff filed a marriage report with C at C’s request while returning from the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”) in early 2017, while living together with C.
On April 18, 2019, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the relevant marina business establishment to D on the recommendation of C, and (b) on April 18, 2019, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 85 million (i.e., KRW 40 million for lease deposit (= KRW 45 million for lease deposit) to D; (c) C stolen a check of the amount equivalent to KRW 45 million, which the Plaintiff was in custody by himself/herself among the said transfer proceeds; and (d) withdrawn the remainder KRW 40 million by being transferred to his/her own account; and (e) departing from China.
The defendant conspireds with C to leave the Republic of Korea with the transfer proceeds of the relevant marina business establishment.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the above tort.
2. The judgment on the cause of the claim and C is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on August 22, 2018, and the defendant's words are without dispute between the parties, and comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 through 8 above, it is acknowledged that the lease contract was concluded in the name of the plaintiff on September 1, 2018 with respect to part of the E-commercial building located in Yongsan-si, ② the fact that the marina branch was operated in the part of the above commercial building, ③ the fact that the relevant marina branch was transferred to D on April 18, 2019, ④ the transfer of KRW 40 million out of the transfer price of the relevant marina branch to D on April 18, 2019, ⑤ the fact that the plaintiff submitted a complaint against the defendant on April 22, 2019, and ⑤ the fact that the plaintiff is currently staying in China.
However, it is insufficient to recognize that the above evidence or the above-mentioned facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the above-mentioned marina business establishment transferred to D was operated by the Plaintiff at his own money as alleged by the Plaintiff.
The defendant's side specifically stated that the start-up fund of the above marina business was not the money possessed by the plaintiff.