손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition (1) at the Defendant office located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around February 2012, the Defendant concluded that “The Plaintiff is aware of the route that he purchases gift certificates issued by a lot department store, a new world department store, a modern department store, and a gold coercion, etc., and then, he/she will cover the principal and 30% of the principal and 30% of the profits in the month of selling.”
However, in fact, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to guarantee the profits of the principal or more by investing the merchandise coupon in the merchandise coupon trading business, even though he did not know the method of live in salt price and received the investment money.
Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the plaintiff as above and belongs thereto from February 24, 2012 to the same year.
9. The sum of KRW 128,200,000 has been transferred to the account of community credit cooperatives (D) in the name of the defendant until December 24.
In this regard, the defendant was delivered property by deceiving the plaintiff.
(2) As the Defendant was indicted and convicted by the Seoul Central District Court 2014Kadan7890 due to the foregoing fraud, etc., the Defendant appealed for three-year imprisonment with prison labor in the first instance and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two-year imprisonment.
[Evidence] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above recognition of damages liability, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages amounting to KRW 128,200,000 and delay damages, barring any special circumstance.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. (1) The defendant asserts that all of the above damages were paid.
In light of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 through 25, the defendant may recognize the fact that the plaintiff has repaid the damage compensation to the plaintiff by the following methods:
No. 1, No. 8,000,000 on April 8, 2012, 201, No. 7,520,000 on April 9, 2012.