beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to KRW 112,776,670 and KRW 112,630,210 among them, Defendant A shall have from February 5, 2014 to August 31, 2015.
Reasons
A. The Plaintiff asserted as the grounds for the claim, and such facts do not conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant A, C, E, and F, and both the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, D, and G are recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, based on the evidence Nos. 1-6, 8-12, and evidence Nos. 7-1 through 7.
According to this, Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of 112,776,670 won in total and the amount of subrogated for the payment of KRW 112,630,210, whichever is the date of subrogation, 12% per annum from February 5, 2014 to August 31, 2015, which is the date of subrogation, 8% per annum from the following day to June 18, 2016, which is the date of final delivery of the complaint filed by the Plaintiff, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.
In addition, Defendant B, C, D, E, F, and G, jointly with Defendant A, have a duty to pay damages for damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the said unlawful act, 112,630,210 won by subrogation, and 5% per annum under the Civil Act from February 5, 2014, the date of service of the complaint filed by the Plaintiff from February 5, 2014 to June 18, 2016, which is the date of service of the complaint filed by the Plaintiff, and damages for delay calculated by 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of payment.
B. Defendant D asserts that Defendant A, who carried out an illegal loan, should be fully liable for the illegal loan or be liable for the defendants to bear only the responsibility in proportion to the profits obtained through deception.
In addition, Defendant B asserts to the effect that the degree of his participation is unreasonable to hold the Plaintiff liable for all the damages incurred by the Plaintiff even if it is unhutiled, and that the above Defendant’s liability should be limited as much as the employee in charge of lending a national bank was negligent in examining the loan.
In the case of joint tort, even though the degree of participation is minor perpetrator, there is liability for all damages, and the intentional tortfeasor is offsetting negligence.