beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.24 2017가합507798

손해배상(기)

Text

1. As to USD 2,409,357.9 and USD 1,945,865.9 among them to the Plaintiff, the Defendant from June 30, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) is a company engaged in the business of developing and selling overseas resources; the Seoul Central District Court 2013 Gohap188 (C) decided to commence rehabilitation procedures on October 17, 2013; and the rehabilitation procedure is in progress upon the rehabilitation plan approval order on March 20, 2014; and the right to manage and dispose of assets was exclusively attached to the Plaintiff, a custodian of A.

B. From June 2013 to July 2014, the Defendant was engaged in the trade in export and import brokerage related to livestock feed, raw materials, etc. while substantially operating a foreign corporation D (representative E) located in Singapore. From June 26, 2013 to July 15, 2014, the Defendant served as the head of the A's strategic project team.

C. On May 12, 2016, the Defendant was convicted of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and occupational breach of trust against A, etc. on May 12, 2016. The Defendant appealed and appealed, but all of which was dismissed, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 1, 2016.

(Seoul High Court Decision 2016No1435 Decided September 7, 2016, and Supreme Court Decision 2016Do15357 Decided December 1, 2016). The Defendant entered A on June 26, 2013 to take exclusive charge of the brokerage business related to the export and import of raw materials for domestic feed, such as short margins and farms, etc. In taking exclusive charge of the brokerage business related to the export and import of domestic feed, the Defendant, upon the absence of a person who is aware of the foreign brokerage business within A, can perform the conclusion of a contract with a foreign local company related to the brokerage business and the execution of local funds in mind, without concealing the fact that the Defendant actually operates D, led A to conduct brokerage trade through D, emphasizing that the domestic business network has been secured, leading A to trade transactions through D through fraud, based on false trade contracts, etc., or deducted the amount of money used for private purposes.

1.With respect to the typha transaction.