2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is primarily asserted by the Plaintiff. The Defendants, despite being aware of the fact that A embezzled the Plaintiff’s money, aided and abetted A’s embezzlement by receiving, acquiring, or managing the amount embezzled by A to a deposit account in the name of the Defendants, or acquired stolens from A. As such, the Defendants asserted with A that as joint tortfeasor of the Plaintiff, the Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to KRW 88,429,222.

Preliminaryly, Defendant B is liable for compensating for damages equivalent to KRW 38,300,50 for each of the 38,300,50 won and the 38,300,50 won by receiving the amount embezzled by A from his own account. Defendant C also is liable for compensating for damages equivalent to KRW 50,128,722 for each of the 50,128,72 won by receiving the amount

B. Defendant C’s assertion did not know in advance the above embezzlement act of Defendant C, and it was much more than the amount remitted to Defendant C’s account with Defendant C’s credit card in the name of the Defendant C to pay for the travel expenses related to A’s business or spent A’s personal consumption. As such, Defendant C aided and abetted A’s embezzlement.

The plaintiff's assertion that he acquired stolens due to embezzlement is improper.

3. In the case of a joint tort under Article 760 of the Civil Code which causes damage to another person jointly by several persons, if the joint tort is objectively jointly related even though there is no conspiracy or common perception among the actors, and the aiding and abetting which imposes liability as a joint tortfeasor under Article 760 (3) of the Civil Code refers to all direct and indirect acts which enable or facilitate the tort.