beta
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2016.04.06 2015가단38440

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant runs wholesale and retail business of steel products, tools, etc. with the trade name “C” in Daegu-gu Section B.

The defendant's wife D is operating independently the iron and tools with the trade name "F" in the same Gu E while serving in C.

B. D concluded a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff on July 18, 2008, and submitted data, such as a tax invoice, etc. that can prove the fact of transactions with a seller, the amount equivalent to the relevant transaction amount would be loaned if the purchaser submits to the Industrial Bank of Korea. In order to reduce the use of bills at the time of commercial transactions and expand cash settlement, D has used a system that enables the purchaser to receive loans from a financial institution and make settlement in cash to the seller.

C. D As stated in attached Table 1, the same year from January 20, 2015

6. By the 15th day, the Defendant purchased 2,628 items in total from the Defendant and issued a tax invoice, and received a total of KRW 121,40,000 from the Industrial Bank of Korea loan of KRW 19 times in total (hereinafter “the instant loan”) and paid the price for the goods to the Defendant.

D The Plaintiff failed to repay the instant purchase financing loan, and on September 8, 2015, on behalf of D, the Plaintiff repaid KRW 162,883,653, including the instant purchase financing loan to the Industrial Bank of Korea.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the assertion is as follows: (a) in collusion with the Defendant, who is a type of sale, would have been able to make additional loans because there remains the limit of corporate purchase financing loans in the event of the aggravation of financial standing and the occurrence of a guarantee accident; and (b) in spite of the fact that there was no transaction of the pertinent goods; (c) deceiving a person in charge of loans to obtain corporate purchase financing from the Industrial Bank of Korea