beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 10, 2007, the Defendant invested KRW 500,000 on the condition that principal is guaranteed by D, but incurred loss of KRW 120,000.
Since then, the plaintiff, who was employed as the employee of the defendant, had paid D KRW 95,00,000, which is a part of it.
B. On June 30, 2008, the Defendant drafted a loan certificate stating that “95,00,000 won is to be repaid by July 30, 2008” to the Plaintiff.
C. On July 1, 2008, the Defendant drafted a “written confirmation (Evidence)” with the purport that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 95,000,000 to the Plaintiff not later than July 30, 2008, because it had the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 95,00,000 for losses.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above agreed amounting to KRW 95,000,000 and damages for delay from August 1, 2008, which is the day following the due date for payment.
B. The defendant's assertion is that although the plaintiff made a substitute payment to D for KRW 95,00,000, the defendant prepared a loan certificate and a written confirmation of facts. Thus, the above loan certificate and written confirmation of facts are all null and void, but the defendant's assertion is not accepted since there is no evidence to support that the plaintiff deceivings the defendant.
C. According to the theory of lawsuit, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 95,00,000 won and 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from August 1, 2008 to May 15, 2018, the delivery date of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.
3. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the first instance as to this conclusion is legitimate.