2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

up to twenty percent (20%) per annum shall be paid.

A. The plaintiff is a legal entity established for the purpose of credit business for its members, and the defendant Lee A

A public official belonging to the Leecheon-gu Office of Tax Affairs shall be a public official.

B. (i) ○○○ Video Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○○ Video”) is a company established for the purpose of the recycling business of general wastes, etc., and KimA is the representative of ○○ Video.

○○○○○○○○○ City completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 4, 1998 with respect to 654 square meters for miscellaneous land 199-8 square meters for ○○○○○○○, ○○○○○○○, 199-8 (hereinafter “the instant land 1”); ○○○○○○, 199-12 miscellaneous land 1127 square meters for miscellaneous land (hereinafter “the instant land 2”); and KimA completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 25, 198 due to the sale on February 25, 1998; ○○○○○, ○○○○, 287, 287-1064 square meters for 1064 square meters for miscellaneous land (hereinafter “the instant land 4”). ○○○, ○○○, 1989, each of which completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 25, 1989.

On January 16, 2001, the attachment registration of the defendant Republic of Korea (hereinafter "the attachment registration of this case") was completed on January 16, 2001 on the land of this case 1/2.

C. (1) The KimCC is the subject of the KimA.

Dor KimCC requested the Plaintiff to provide a loan secured by the land Nos. 1 through 4 of this case, and the Plaintiff demanded to provide a security in the state of removing the burden, including the seizure registration of this case, on the land Nos. 1 through 4 of this case.

D. (1) On April 29, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 170 million to KimCC (hereinafter “the loan of this case”). On the land of this case 1 through 4, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of superficies, each of which was owned by the building and trees, with the maximum debt amount as of April 29, 2008, according to the conclusion of the mortgage contract and the superficies creation contract on April 29, 2008, in order to secure the loan of this case between ○○ video management and KimA, as to the land of this case (hereinafter “the loan of this case”).

At the time of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring land of this case, the land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case was registered.

E. After that, the plaintiff filed an application for the auction of real estate rent on the land Nos. 1 through 4 with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch of Suwon District Court in order to repay the loan claims of this case, the above court decided to commence voluntary auction on September 9, 2009. On September 9, 2009, the decision to commence voluntary auction was completed on September 9, 2009 (hereinafter "the auction case of this case").

F. On August 6, 2010, E-tax Office submitted a written request for delivery with the amount of KRW 130,681,510 to the auction case of this case, the delinquent taxpayer filed a written request for delivery with the amount of KRW 130,681,510. On October 25, 2010, the following distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) was prepared on October 25, 201.

G. After that, on April 24, 2013, the Disciplinary Action Committee, which belongs to the Plaintiff, decided to compensate the Plaintiff for the amount of KRW 85,523,00 (i.e., 68,418,400 + 17,104,60) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s employees Park Jong-D and MaE were liable for considerable damages due to the significant details related to the instant loan, etc. (i.e., e., e., e., e., e., e., e., Do indemnity)

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2 through 5, evidence 2-1 through 3, evidence 3-1, 4-2, Eul evidence 1-1 through 4, part of witness KimCC's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) On February 4, 2008, Defendant A, who is a public official belonging to thischeon Tax Office, was asked KimCC about the delinquent tax amount of the ○○ Video, and provided that the registration of the seizure of this case may be cancelled if only 2,820,660 won was paid to KimCC due to intention or gross negligence, contrary to the fact, due to intention or gross negligence, Defendant A, who is a public official belonging to thischeon Tax Office, had confirmed that the registration of the seizure of this case could be cancelled if he paid 2,820,660 won of the global income tax of KimCC. In addition, Defendant A, who is a public official belonging to this Seocheon Tax Office, submitted a written claim for the auction of this case with the amount of the 00,681,510 won, different from the fact due to intentional or gross negligence, the delinquent taxpayer of the auction case of this case submitted the written claim to 130,681,

B. On April 8, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,820,660 of the above global income tax, and paid KRW 2,820,660, the national tax in arrears was fully paid, and the attachment registration of this case was also believed to have been cancelled immediately. While implementing the instant loan to KimCC, the Plaintiff concluded a mortgage contract, etc. and completed the establishment registration of the instant mortgage in order to secure the instant loan obligations with ○○ Video, etc. on the land Nos. 1 through 4. On October 25, 2010, the Plaintiff received only KRW 93,685,458 out of the principal and interest of the instant loan from the instant auction case and received dividends of KRW 105,325,436.

Fidelity, Defendant A, etc., who is a public official belonging to Echeon Tax Office, has inflicted damages on the Plaintiff in violation of the law by intention or gross negligence while performing the above duties. As such, the Defendants are liable to pay damages amounting to KRW 85,523,00 and damages for delay as sought by the Plaintiff to the respective Plaintiff.

B. Determination

First, on February 4, 2008, Defendant 1 announced that the attachment registration of this case may be cancelled if only KRW 2,820,660 of the KimCC was paid to Kim 2,80,000, and confirmed the fact that 00 employees belonging to the Plaintiff prior to the loan of this case was in full payment of the national tax in arrears and the scheduled fact of cancelling the attachment registration of this case. On the other hand, on the other hand, on the issue of whether the non-existence of the official name belonging to Leecheon-gun was engaged in the illegal execution of duties by submitting a written request for delivery different from the facts of the auction of this case, the Plaintiff’s partial testimony of No. 1-7, the witness Kim 2, as shown in the Plaintiff’s argument, was not trusted, and the Plaintiff’s testimony of the above 80,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00.

3. Conclusion

Thus, all of the plaintiff's claims against the defendants are dismissed as it is without merit.

this decision is delivered with the judgment of the court.