손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion was that the defendants would complete the construction work and sell the loan with the loan of the construction cost as the construction cost falls short of the construction cost in the construction site that they proceed to E (Seoul F).
Accordingly, the plaintiffs gave E KRW 200 million (Plaintiff A's KRW 140 million, Plaintiff B's KRW 60 million).
However, E and G (project owner) discontinued the construction work without using the money received from the plaintiffs.
The construction site is subject to voluntary auction, and construction business operators exercise the right of retention.
The defendants used E's account for the purpose of acquiring the plaintiffs' money, and used the money received from the plaintiffs for personal purpose.
The Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiffs for damages.
2. The judgment of the Defendants stated that the Defendants would sell the loan when they lent the construction cost to the Plaintiffs, or there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants received KRW 200 million from the Plaintiffs.
According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Plaintiff A paid KRW 10,000,00 to H on October 12, 2016, KRW 85,000,000 to E on February 16, 2017, KRW 10,000 to Defendant D Co., Ltd. on February 17, 2017, KRW 4,800,000 to E Co., Ltd. on March 29, 2017, KRW 30,200,000 to E on April 7, 2017, Plaintiff B paid KRW 60,000,00 to E Co., Ltd. on February 16, 2017; Plaintiff paid KRW 70,000,000 to E Co., Ltd., Ltd. on the remainder of the contract for sale in lots, the remainder of the contract for sale in lots is recognized by the Plaintiff’s agent on February 16, 2017.
3. Conclusion, the plaintiffs' claim against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.