Attorney Seo-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

2. B2 (Examine 61, South Korea)

3. B3 (Net 66 Years, South Korea)

4. B4 (Year 71, South Korea)

5. Stock company B5

Law Firm Gyeongsung, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant

Attorney Song Sung-sung et al.

6. Stock company B6

Law Firm Fae, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Kim Dong-soo, Justice Cho Dong-soo, Justice Cho Jong-soo, Justice Cho Jong-soo, Justice Park Jong-chul

March 12, 2009 (Defendant 2, 5, and 6)

May 14, 2009 (Defendant 1)

A. Defendant B2, B3, and B4 are jointly and severally and severally 160,00,000,000 and the amount calculated by applying each ratio of 60% per annum from June 29, 2007 to June 29, 2007, 30% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, and 5% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment;

B. Defendant B1 shall pay 149,00,000 of the above amounts and 5% per annum from April 16, 2007 to June 4, 2009, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment;

C. Defendant B5 and B6 shall pay 89,40,000 won among the above amounts and 5% per annum from March 16, 2007 to June 4, 2009 and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendants are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, the Plaintiff and the Defendant B1, B2, B3, and B4 share the remainder, and the remainder share the Defendant B1, B2, B3, and B4 share the remainder, and the Plaintiff share the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B5 and B6 share the remainder, and the remainder share the Defendant B5 and B6 share the remainder.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

A. 1) Defendant B1 retired from office for about 15 years at Defendant B5 Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Bank”) and worked until May 2007 by entering Defendant B6 Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant”) as a lending mother’s house and serving until February 2007.

2) The Defendant Company holds 95.5% shares of Defendant Bank and 4.5% shares of Defendant Bank, and accounts for the full basis of business and profit-making activities by commission of Defendant Bank and Defendant Bank.

3) The terms of delegation agreements entered into between the defendant bank and the defendant company in connection with loan solicitation, and the terms of delegation agreements entered into between the defendant company and the defendant B1, are as follows:

(a) Article 1 (Definitions) of the terms of delegation of loan recruitment business

1. The term "loan solicitor" means a person who is engaged in the loan recruitment business under the contract with the company;

Article 2 (Business Activities) The scope of loan recruitment services entrusted by the Bank to the Company shall be as follows:

1. The kinds of loans subject to solicitation shall be Korean Housing Finance Corporation's mortgage theory and loans to individuals who offer housing as security for at least one year, and the subject matters may be modified by mutual agreement;

2. A company shall conduct the acts of recommending a loan applicant to obtain a loan from a bank and the business of receiving documents for loans (including confirmation of the applicant and himself/herself at the time of preparation of documents), and the bank shall decide to conduct essential business, such as decision on whether to grant a loan, and execution of a loan;

3. A bank may carry out the business of re-verification of whether or not an applicant for a loan applies, etc. in order to verify the authenticity of an applicant for a loan. Where the bank intends to confirm and confirm the genuine intention of the applicant for a loan, it shall cooperate with the applicant;

4. A company may perform incidental affairs of a bank within the scope determined by the bank in addition to loan business subject to solicitation. In such cases, the scope of business, standards for payment of remuneration, etc. shall be determined separately by the bank

Article 4 (Prohibited Matters) No company shall engage in any of the following acts in connection with loan recruitment business:

1. Concluding an agency contract similar to any other financial institution for the kinds of loans subject to solicitation under Article 2;

2. Demanding or receiving a loan applicant fees or money or valuables other than those prescribed in Article 6;

4. Divulging any information or personal credit information acquired while conducting his/her duties, or using it unlawfully.

6. Entrusting a company or a solicitor affiliated with a company to provide loans to a third party, or placing subordinate organizations or solicitors;

11. The company under Article 5 (Duty to Observe) shall observe the following matters in relation to loan recruitment business:

1. Due care shall be exercised to prevent any damage to the reputation or credit of banks;

3. In conducting loan recruitment business, the applicant shall be confirmed to be the applicant's identity, and the applicant shall be stated directly and signed by the applicant, and the applicant shall not prepare an application on behalf of the applicant by telephone or by other means;

4. A loan solicitor shall explain the loan product to the applicant, explain the terms and conditions, and deliver the terms and conditions to him/her at the time of lending, and also perform duties, such as explanation and issuance of credit information handling policies;

5. A loan solicitor shall notify the applicant of the fact that he/she is a loan solicitor at the time of receipt of the loan documents;

7. Upon entering into a contract, a company shall provide a bank with the current status of its organization, such as its main and branch relations, and shall provide a bank with any change in its organization.

Article 6 (Audit) In order to minimize information leakage, prohibited matters and risk factors for compliance and to ensure the stability of the loan recruitment business, if necessary, the Bank shall have the right to audit the portion related to the implementation of this contract and may request the Company to correct, compensate for, etc. in accordance with the audit results.

Article 7 (Remuneration, etc.)

(1) Fees, methods for payment, etc. that a bank pays to a company in connection with the conduct of loan solicitation business shall be as prescribed in attached Table 1.

VIII. (Status and Liability) Companies and employees of companies shall in no case be treated as being employed by banks, and banks shall be discharged from liability as employers to companies and employees of such companies.

Article 12 (Indemnification)

(1) Where a company (including loan solicitors) violates the terms and conditions of a contract or inflicts loss on an applicant for a loan due to an illegal or unjust act in conducting loan recruitment business entrusted under Article 2, the bank shall compensate the applicant for the loss on behalf of the company. Article 14 (Education) The bank may conduct education, such as relevant Acts and guidelines, in order to obtain the knowledge and knowledge of the loan products and to prevent the civil petition, and the company shall comply therewith.

B) Article 1(Definitions) of the delegation agreement for the recruitment of housing mortgage loans

(2) The term "loan solicitor" means a person engaged in the lending of loans under a contract with the company;

(3) Loan solicitation service means the service of making recommendations by the customer to obtain loans from the bank, and of lending consultation and receipt of documents (including confirmation service by the principal and by the person in whose case the documents are prepared).

Article 2 (Scope of Loan Solicitation Business)

(1) The type of loan subject to the solicitation is a single loan to an individual as security and may be changed by mutual agreement. (1) The type of loan subject to the solicitation is a single-year or longer loan to the Korean Housing Finance Corporation and to an individual as security.

(2) The contractor’s solicitation service is to conduct the customer’s solicitation to obtain a loan from the bank, and to conduct loan consultation and receive documents (including confirmation service on the principal and the principal upon document preparation). The bank will undertake essential business, such as determination of whether to grant a loan, and execution of a loan.

(3) In order to verify the authenticity of the applicant’s application for the loan, the bank may re-verification the applicant’s application for the loan. The contractor must cooperate with the bank if the bank wishes to verify the authenticity of the applicant’s application for the loan.

(4) In addition to loan solicitation business, a contractor may conduct incidental business of a bank within the scope determined by the company and the bank. In such cases, the scope of such business, standards for payment of fees, etc. shall be determined separately.

Article 3 (Remuneration, etc.)

(1) The Company shall pay to the contractor a certain percentage of the business performance (for the team leader, the performance of the business team members).

Article 6 (Prohibited Matters) No contractor shall engage in any of the following conduct in connection with loan recruitment business:

(a) Concluding an agency contract similar to another financial institution for the kind of loan subject to solicitation under Article 2;

(2) Demanding or giving or receiving any separate fees or money or valuables, other than those provided for in Article 3, to the applicant;

(d) Leakage or unlawful use of any information or personal credit information acquired while performing his/her duties;

(5) Franchising customers (e) franchising, verbal abuse, revolving, and other unfair tort

(6) Entrusting a third party with loan recruitment business, or placing an subordinate organization or a solicitor;

(11) The contractor under section 7 (Duty to Observe) who has impliedly altered the lending documents must comply with the following requirements in connection with the lending recruitment business:

(1) The contractor shall not engage in any act of divulging secrets that he has learned in the course of his duties, impairing the reputation or impairing the credit of the bank or the company.

(3) In carrying out loan recruitment business, the applicant must check the identity of the applicant and have him/her write his/her name on his/her own, and shall not prepare an application on behalf of the applicant by telephone or by other means.

(4) When making a loan, the applicant must explain the loan product, explain the terms and conditions, and deliver the terms and conditions to the applicant, and also perform such tasks as explanation and delivery of the credit information handling policy.

(5) At the time of receipt of the loan document, the loan applicant must be notified.

Article 8 (Status and Responsibilities)

A contractor shall in no case be treated as being employed by a bank or company, and a bank or company shall not be liable as an employer.

4) During the Defendant Company’s tenure of office, Defendant B1 worked at the Defendant Bank’s original point, and worked as a lending solicitor. The Defendant Bank provided an office necessary for loan consultation, etc. with books, chairs, shocks, computers, telephone machines, etc. and provided an office behind the rest in the branch.

B. 1) Defendant B2 offered the payment guarantee of the Bank to Defendant B3. Accordingly, Defendant B2 requested the lending of funds necessary to purchase the telecom located in Masan-dong, Defendant B3 again requested Defendant B4 to the head of the office of a certified judicial scrivener, and Defendant B4 again requested Defendant B to the head of the office of a certified judicial scrivener. On March 16, 2007, Defendant B and B4 visited Defendant B 1 as the office of the original branch of the Bank. (2) Defendant B1 offered the payment guarantee of the Bank’s KRW 400 million in total with Defendant B’s KRW 100,000,000,000 won and KRW 40,000,000,000 won and KRW 160,000,000,000,000 won and KRW 40,000,000,000,000 won and KRW 60,000,00,000 won.

C. On March 16, 2007, Defendant B3 and B4 signed the above payment guarantee letter in the name of the original branch of the Defendant Bank, and around that time, Defendant B2 signed a loan certificate stating that the payment period of KRW 175 million was fixed at 5% of the interest month on April 16, 2007 and issued it to the Plaintiff.

D. Defendant B1 paid to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 15 million on April 16, 2007, and KRW 5 million on May 18, 2007.

【Reasons for Recognition】

○○ Defendant B1, Bank, and Company: without any dispute; Gap evidence 1 through 4; Gap evidence 7-1, 2; Eul evidence 8-3, 5, 6, 7; Gap evidence 9-2, 4 through 16; Gap evidence 10; Eul evidence 1 through 6; Eul evidence 1, 2; Eul evidence 4-2, 4, 5, 5, 6; Eul evidence 5-1 through 5; Eul evidence 5-6; Eul evidence 5-1 through 5; Eul evidence 6, and 7; the inquiry results of the fact-finding on the points of ideas of B/L Bank;

○ Defendant B2: Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Decision by public notice)

2. Claims against Defendant B3, B4: Article 208(3)1 and Article 257(1)2. Claims against Defendant B1, B2, B3, and B4 of the Civil Procedure Act

According to the above facts, Defendant B2, B3, and B4 are jointly and severally and severally liable for the remainder of loans and payment deposit 160 million won (175 million won - 15 million won) as the principal debtor or joint guarantor of the loan for consumption or the contract, and the part claiming damages from April 17, 2007 (207 April 16, 2007) to be paid with the amount of damages from April 16, 2007 to June 29, 2007, and 30 billion won per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, and 30 billion won per annum from the next day to the date of full payment (30 billion won per annum from June 16, 2007; 40 billion won per annum from the next day to the date of full payment; 50 billion won per annum from the date of the contract to the date of full payment; 50 billion won per annum 60 million won per annum from the date of enforcement of the Interest Limitation Act).

3. Claim against the defendant bank or company;

(a) Occurrence of and limitation on liability for damages;

1) According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the Defendant bank has the right to audit the matters prohibited in connection with the loan recruitment business and to request correction and compensation for the portion related thereto. Meanwhile, the Defendant bank is obligated to comply with the education of the Defendant bank’s incidental business within the scope determined by the Defendant bank (Article 2(4) of the delegation contract for loan recruitment business, Article 2(4) of the delegation contract for house loan recruitment business), and the loan recruiter’s duty to comply with the laws and guidelines conducted by the Defendant bank. Under such circumstances, the Defendant bank’s income or remuneration for the loan recruiter’s employees is a structure entirely dependent on the fee for the loan recruitment business paid by the Defendant bank (Article 5-5), and it is reasonable to view that the Defendant bank is not in charge of the Defendant bank’s internal business and the Defendant bank is not in charge of the Defendant bank’s internal business with respect to the loan solicitor’s affiliated business (Article 73.3% of the loan solicitor’s loan recruitment business, and the remainder of the loan solicitor’s loan recruitment business among the Defendant bank’s employees and the Defendant bank’s supervising’s employer.

Defendant B1, who is a loan solicitor, has been aware of the loan execution under the provisional approval of Defendant Bank’s loan, thereby guaranteeing that Defendant B1 would deposit the funds to the Plaintiff’s account by lending the necessary funds to Defendant B2, who is the first applicant for the loan, and for this purpose, acquiring money by deceiving the Plaintiff with the belief of the Plaintiff by preparing and providing the payment guarantee letter in the name of Defendant Bank’s original branch.

As such, the defendant B1's series of such acts will be deemed to be related to the act of performing the affairs of the defendant bank and the defendant company, which is an external form, objective loan-raising, loan-raising, and intermediary business.

Therefore, Defendant Bank and Defendant Company are the employers of Defendant B1, who are liable for damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the tort.

2) Defendant Bank and Defendant Company: (a) The Plaintiff’s act of Defendant B1 constitutes an act of performing business affairs.

The employer's responsibility cannot be borne because he knew or was grossly negligent in not knowing that he did not have been responsible.

살피건대, 갑 제5호증, 갑 제9호증의 11, 12, 을바 제4호증의 6, 을마 제6, 8, 9호증, 을바 제7호증의 각 기재에 의하면, 원고가 금원대여 부탁을 받고 피고 B1을 만나기 전에 "은행이 미쳤느냐, 은행에 돈 천지다. 은행이 나한테 왜 돈을 빌리느냐."라고 말하고, 수사기관에서 이 사건 피해에 관하여 진술하면서 "지금 생각하면 3살짜리 애라도 안 속을 것 같은데."라고 한 사실, 원고가 피고 B1에게 금원을 교부 내지 송금한 후 의구심을 갖고 피고 B3, B4의 연대보증을 받았으며 수표 발행 은행에 지급정지신청을한 사실, 피고 B1이 제공한 지급보증서 및 사용인감계가 피고 은행에서 사용하는 양식과 다르고 기재사항의 누락이 있는 등 내용도 허술한 측면이 있는 사실, 피고 B1이 원고에게 준 명함의 앞면은 피고 은행의 로고와 상호 및 인터넷주소가 크게 기재되어 있고, 그 아래 피고 B1의 이름 다음에 조그맣게 "(주)B6 | SR"이라고 적힌 부분이 "대출 상품사업부 창원지점/차장"이라는 기재로 연결되는 사실을 인정할 수 있으나, 이러한 사실이나 지급보증의 내용이 1억 6,400만 원을 빌려주고 1개월 후 원리금으로 1억 7,500만 원을 지급받는 고리의 금전거래에 관한 것이라는 점 등 위 피고들이 내세우는 사정을 모아 본다고 하더라도, 원고도 은행에서 사인간의 금전거래에 관하여 지급보증을 한다는 것 등에 의문을 가졌다가 피고 은행 창원지점에 있는 피고 B1의 사무실에서 피고 은행의 배지를 달고 명함을 제시하며 은행 차장으로 행세하는 피고 B1의 설명과 함께 보증서류 등의 제공 약속을 듣고 이를 신뢰하게 된 나머지 금원을 교부 내지 송금하게 된 것이고, 대출모집인은 고객이 은행으로부터 대출을 받도록 권유하는 행위와 대출상담, 서류접수의 업무를 수행하는 것으로 지점에서 사무실까지 제공받은 대출모집인을 정식 은행 직원과 외부에서 구분하기는 용이하지 않을 것으로 보이는 점 등에 비추어 볼 때, 위와 같은 사정만으로는 원고에게 피고 B1의 행위가 사무집행행위가 아님에 관하여 고의가 있었다거나 이를 알지 못한 것이 중대한 과실, 즉 거의 고의에 가까운 정도의 주의를 결여하였거나, 또는 공평의 관점에서 구태여 보호할 필요가 없다고 봄이 상당하다고 인정되는 상태로 인한 것이었다고 할 수 없다.

Therefore, the above argument of the defendant bank and the defendant company is without merit.

B) Although Defendant Company asserted that Defendant B1 should be exempted from liability with due care to appoint Defendant B1 and supervise its affairs, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the above assertion. However, as seen earlier, there is no other evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, the above assertion by Defendant Company is also groundless. However, there is an irregular aspect to the extent that the Plaintiff would be applying for the suspension of payment to Defendant B3 and B4 for the check issuing bank, which received the joint and several guarantee of Defendant B3 and B4 from the immediately following the transaction in this case where the Plaintiff would be guaranteed the payment of the Defendant Bank, and Defendant B2 lent the money to Defendant B, as seen earlier, there was an irregular aspect to the extent that the Plaintiff would be applying for the suspension of payment to the check issuing bank, which was paid for the joint and several guarantee of Defendant B3 and B4. Although it should have been paid more attention as to whether the Plaintiff falls under a normal bank transaction, the Plaintiff was found to have been negligent, and as such, the occurrence and expansion of damages caused by the Plaintiff’s negligence, it is reasonable to consider in calculating damages.

B. Scope of liability for damages

Damage to be compensated by the defendant bank and the defendant company is 89 million won (149 million won x 60 percent).

C. Sub-decision

Therefore, the defendant bank and the company are obliged to pay damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from March 16, 2007, which is the date of the judgment of this case, until June 4, 2009, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the date of full payment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Choi-hee

Judges Shin Jae-sung