beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.08 2015나2026328

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

(b).

Reasons

1. In the first instance trial on the scope of this court’s trial, the Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant shared and embezzled the Plaintiff’s money KRW 779,210,210 on 208 occasions from January 26, 2004 to December 24, 2007,” and claimed the said money and its delay damages as compensation for tort.

The first instance court dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s claims on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge the Defendant’s embezzlement.

As to this, the Plaintiff appealed only 34 times as shown in the separate sheet, “the portion embezzled by embezzlement of 343,425,770 won in total,” and only this part is subject to the judgment of this court.

2. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff Company was established on November 18, 199 as a company engaging in design and other technical service business.

Plaintiff

D, the representative director of the company, was established with Defendant B, and was appointed by the representative director, and Defendant B was appointed by the director of the company on November 18, 199.

Defendant C is the wife of Defendant B.

B. Defendant B took charge of accounting affairs at the Plaintiff Company from November 18, 1999 to December 31, 2007.

On January 6, 2014, the Plaintiff dismissed Defendant B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence Nos. 1 to 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. The parties' assertion

A. Defendant B, while taking charge of accounting affairs, embezzled the Plaintiff’s total sum of KRW 343,425,770 by withdrawing from the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff or transferring it to the Defendants’ account as indicated in the separate sheet, and Defendant C also participated in the Defendant B’s crime.

Therefore, the Defendants, a joint tortfeasor, are jointly and severally liable to pay the said money and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendants’ assertion did not constitute an embezzlement of the Plaintiff’s money.

Although part of the Plaintiff’s money has been transferred to the account under the name of the Defendants, it is in accordance with D instructions, and all of the Plaintiff.