손해배상(기)
1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit;
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2-2, the plaintiff purchased, on January 8, 201, the real estate auction procedure (hereinafter in this case, referred to as the "real estate") from Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 10, 201. The plaintiff, on October 20, 201, set up a mortgage (hereinafter referred to as "D"), the debtor corporation, the maximum debt amount of KRW 170,000,00 for mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the "mortgage-backed mortgage"), and the real estate in this case, upon application for Seoan-gu, may not be acknowledged as having been sold to a third party during the auction procedure (the Daejeon District Court branch support, and the voluntary auction procedure in this case, hereinafter referred to as the "voluntary auction procedure") established on May 2, 2012.
2. Determination on the main claim
A. (1) On October 201, 201, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant, as a co-operator of D, caused the Plaintiff to offer the instant real estate as security for D by deceiving the Plaintiff, by stating that “F, as a co-operator of D, was supplied with fishery products of the instant real estate as security by the Seosan Fisheries Cooperative, Seosan District, which would be sold and immediately paid the sales proceeds, and purchase the instant real estate in KRW 180,00,000,” and thus, had the Plaintiff offer the instant real estate as security.
Afterward, the Defendant sold fishery products supplied from the Seosan Fisheries Cooperatives, but did not pay the sales proceeds to the Plaintiff and did not cancel the said security, thereby making the instant real estate sold during the instant voluntary auction procedure.
As a result, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 490,000,000, which is the appraisal price of the instant real property, but the Defendant was mitigated to KRW 170,000,000. Since the Defendant paid KRW 90,000 among them, the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to KRW 80,000,000.