대위에 의한 대여금 청구의 소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Suwon District Court Decision 2017Gahap17651, which sought payment of KRW 800 million and damages for delay, on the ground of the fact that “the Plaintiff was obtained by defraudation KRW 800 million, which belongs to C’s deception.”
B. The Suwon District Court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 80 million and the amount calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from January 1, 2017 to October 26, 2017, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment,” and the above judgment became final and conclusive.
C. On May 4, 2018, the Suwon District Court sentenced the Plaintiff to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime that “C acquired KRW 794 million from the Plaintiff,” and thereafter dismissed C’s appeal, which became final and conclusive in the above criminal judgment.
【Ground of recognition】 An without any dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion has a claim against C with KRW 80 million and its delay damages claim, and as the insolvent C does not exercise its loan claim of KRW 300 million against the Defendant, the Plaintiff shall exercise the above claim by subrogation of C.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 300 million won and damages for delay directly to the plaintiff.
3. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to whether the Defendant borrowed KRW 300 million from C, and as to the statement No. 4-11, 26, 39, 40, and 44 of the evidence No. 4, it is recognized that C stated to the effect that “A was investigated by an investigative agency as a criminal act against the Plaintiff and lent KRW 300 million to the Defendant,” and that the Defendant stated that “A was subject to investigation as a witness by an investigative agency in relation to C’s fraud case, and received KRW 300 million from C,” respectively.
However, the above evidence and evidence No. 4-29 are as follows, i.e., the whole purport of the pleadings.