According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiff's claim against the defendant for compensation of KRW 252,745,765, which is equivalent to the market price, since the defendant had been in custody on April 27, 1981, as a raw material for Aluminium (M/T) 181,4185, as a result of voluntary consumption of Aluminium production work, and the plaintiff paid damages of KRW 252,745,765, which is equivalent to the market price, to the defendant. Meanwhile, the non-party Credit Guarantee Fund provided credit guarantee to the plaintiff for export support from the Seoul Trust Bank up to KRW 300,000,00 among the loans granted by the non-party trust bank for export support, and the defendant was a joint guarantor for the above Credit Guarantee Fund, and the plaintiff was a joint guarantor for the plaintiff's claim against the above 768,474,903,90,000 from the Seoul Trust Bank for compensation of KRW 250,3630,2979,29,200.

However, it is clear that the so-called "voluntary consumption of Leart," which was possessed by the defendant, which was acknowledged by the court below, constitutes an intentional tort, and Article 496 of the Civil Act provides for a prohibition of offset in order to obtain actual satisfaction with respect to the claim for damages arising from intentional tort. Thus, set-off against the claim for damages of this case against the passive claim is not allowed in accordance with Article 496 of the Civil Act.

In so determining, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on offset, and since it is obvious that the judgment affected the judgment, the judgment of the court below is against justice and equity unless it is reversed.

Therefore, the judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young