beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.17 2013가합11025

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant F was actually establishing and operating the I University on February 28, 1991, and the J University on March 4, 2005, and Defendant G was the president from around 2006 to Defendant G, and Defendant H was the president of J University from around 2005 to December 13, 201. Plaintiff A was working as professor of J University from March 1, 2006 to December 13, 201, Plaintiff B from March 1, 2007, Plaintiff C from March 5, 2005, and Plaintiff D from March 1, 2005 to March 1, 2005, and from March 1, 2007 to March 1, 2007.

B. (1) Around June 2006, Defendant F instructed Defendant G and Defendant H to obtain a living stabilization fund from the Korea Teachers Pension Corporation under the name of professors belonging thereto and to use it as operating expenses of the school.

(2) Accordingly, Defendant G and Defendant H called “F Chairman’s instructions. To receive a loan for the stabilization of livelihood from the Korea Teachers’ Pension & Staff and deliver it to the Plaintiffs, it would make a reimbursement in lieu of it at school.” Accordingly, Plaintiff A received a loan from the Korea Teachers’ Pension Foundation on June 11, 2007; Plaintiff B received a loan of KRW 30,000,000 from Defendant G’s account on the same day; Plaintiff B received a loan of KRW 37,000,000 on October 17, 2006; Plaintiff C received a loan of KRW 30,000,000 on the same day; Plaintiff C received a loan of KRW 30,000 on the same day; Plaintiff D received a loan of KRW 23,50,000 on the same day; Plaintiff D received a loan of KRW 30,000 on November 3, 206; and deposited it into Defendant H account on the same day as Defendant G’s account on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 through 6, 11 through 15 (Ga number omitted), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on a claim for damages due to a tort

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the Defendants made a loan under the names of the plaintiffs by threatening the plaintiffs, and thereby, did not reach the extent of the loan, or of the settlement of novels.