손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion made a false tax invoice under the presumption that there was no actual transaction, and entered it on the homepage of the MP company (the company entrusted with the business of electronic commerce contract) from December 31, 2010 to May 4, 2011, and acquired 53,000,000 won from a new bank (hereinafter “new bank”) to the account of Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”), and the Plaintiff paid 86,714,481 won by subrogation to the new bank due to the failure to repay the above loan. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s deception by the new bank constitutes a tort. Accordingly, the Plaintiff is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the guaranteed rate of 85,050,000 won out of the above false purchase loan (=53,000,0000 x85%).
2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including paper numbers) and the result of the response of the order to submit tax information to the director of the tax office of the Cheongju District Tax Office of this court to submit financial transaction information to the new bank, defendant Gap and the defendant Eul entered the MP company's website as if they were engaged in such transaction even if they did not trade each of the goods on February 31, 201, February 1, 2011, April 14, 2011, and May 4, 201. The defendant Eul received 53,000,000 won from the new bank from December 31, 201 to May 4, 2011, it is difficult to conclude that the defendants received 53,00,000 won in aggregate from the new bank to the corporate purchase loan from the new bank as a result of the response of the order to submit financial transaction information to the new bank. However, in light of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 through 6 (including No.).
(1)