Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. From April 2004 to December 2005, the Plaintiff was a director of C’s Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”)’s management from around April 2004 to around December 2, 2005. The Plaintiff and Green Mutual Savings Bank, upon the request of the Plaintiff and C, lent KRW 6 billion to E on April 3, 2004, through the Defendant, a loan broker, KRW 6 billion, KRW 8 billion, KRW 4 billion, KRW 7, 2004, KRW 12 billion, each of the above companies, and KRW 30 billion, respectively.
(hereinafter referred to as “the primary loan of this case”). B.
On June 25, 2004, the non-party company received a loan of KRW 1.5 billion from the defendant, KRW 800 million from the ASEAN Mutual Savings Bank on July 23, 2004, KRW 5.7 billion from the Hyundai Switzerland Savings Bank on the same day, KRW 5.7 billion from the teachers' or Rain Savings Bank on July 30, 2004, KRW 1.3.8 billion from the teachers' or Rain Savings Bank on July 30, 2004 (hereinafter "the second loan of this case"), and repaid part of the first loan of this case with the above money.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 3 each 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff is the cause of the claim in this case, which is the cause of the claim in this case, and the defendant received KRW 270 million from the plaintiff as if the additional fees were incurred even though all of the fees for the first loan of this case were paid to Puho Mutual Savings Bank by deducting the fees of KRW 1.2 billion from the loan of this case. Since the first loan of this case is likely to have been pointed out in the audit, it is likely that the plaintiff will receive a new loan and repay part of the loan of this case, but the defendant would bear a double burden of KRW 436,781,90 as the expenses for the second loan of this case. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the total damages of KRW 706,781,90 and damages for delay.
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 2 and 5, the Plaintiff’s first loan, May 18, 2004, after the loan of this case.