(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.01.19 2015가단7030

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.01.19 2015가단7030

손해배상

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 24, 2015, the Defendant received a proposal that “a copy of the passbook and a copy of the driver’s license will be sent by facsimile by raising credit by making the result of the deposit of the token money from a person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of the person in the name of

B. On February 26, 2015, the Plaintiff listened to the phrase “the case number No. 2014 type A 0668 C was delayed in the illegal use case, the passbook in the name of the party was created in the agricultural cooperative and the Han Bank, and all of the money in the principal transaction account shall be transferred to the Plaintiff’s agricultural cooperative account, and all of the money in the other accounts shall be transferred to the Plaintiff’s agricultural cooperative account, and any risk prevention measures shall be taken from the person who was not the party’s name after being notified of the password and the OTP number.”

C. By using the information known to the Plaintiff, the person under whose name the Plaintiff used to transfer KRW 21 million from the Plaintiff’s agricultural bank account to the Defendant’s single bank account under the name of the Defendant, and demanded the Defendant to withdraw it. On February 26, 2015, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 21 million from the Han Bank Digital Digital Branch on February 14:57, 2015, and sent it to the person under whose name the Plaintiff was named.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap's evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant conspireds with the person who is not a party to the name but a third party, thereby deceiving the plaintiff, and even if the defendant did not conspired with the person who has deposited money in his/her own account, the defendant could have sufficiently predicted that the account in his/her name can be used for the crime of telephone financing, such as singing, etc.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2014.01.23 2013고단4528

-부산지방법원 2015.11.10 2014가단91385

-부산지방법원 2015.01.28 2014가단63625

-인천지방법원 2018.12.13 2018나3403

-서울북부지방법원 2015.10.30 2014가단8636