(영문) 대구지방법원 2021.6.17. 선고 2020나2708 판결

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 47,100,000 won with interest rate of 12% per annum from the day following the day of service of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the revocation is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship between the parties

The defendant is a person working as the director of the ○○ apartment A/S center in Daegu-gun, and the plaintiff is a person working as the above apartment management engineer.

B. Progress of criminal cases against the defendant

1) On January 16, 2020, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2,00,000 as the Seoggu District Court Branch Decision 2018DaMa81, Seogu District Court on the grounds of the fact that the Defendant deceivings the Plaintiff to acquire money by deceiving the Plaintiff as follows.

○ Crimes around May 4, 2017

On May 4, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the Plaintiff that “The regular director of ○○ Construction in Daejeon is next to that of the ○○ Construction in Daejeon, and will be employed as the head of the Daegu Gyeong-gu Gyeongbuk-S Center and would be expected to be employed.” Accordingly, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 766,800 in total under the name of the meal expenses related to employment, and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to that amount.

○ Crimes around June 5, 2017

On June 5, 2017, the Defendant sent 300,000 won to the Plaintiff, “If you send the said money to B, you will use the said money as the purchase cost for the material for the material for the material for the electric installations and give a distance equivalent to KRW 300,000,000 for the material for the electric installations purchased, along with an additional distance.” On the other hand, the Defendant sent KRW 300,000,000 to B, and then fraudulently received KRW 300,000 from the Plaintiff.

2) On January 23, 2020, the Defendant appealed as Daegu District Court 2020No134, which was dissatisfied with the above judgment, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on April 7, 2021. The Defendant is again dissatisfied with the above judgment on April 30, 2021, and is still pending in the final appeal as Supreme Court Decision 2021Do5087.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claim for damages caused by employment fraud;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Defendant, by deceiving the Plaintiff that he was employed in ○○ Construction, forced the Plaintiff to remain employed in another place. Accordingly, the Plaintiff did not work properly while waiting for four months.

Therefore, the Defendant’s total damages amounting to KRW 16,500,000 (=)

13,600,000 won (=3,400,000 won x 4 months) + 400% of Boners 400%) and damages for delay are liable to pay them.

B. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

Property damage caused by an illegal act refers to the difference between the property condition that would have existed without the illegal act and the property condition after the illegal act became effective (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da39633, Nov. 10, 200; 2002Da12659, Jan. 26, 2006). The burden of proving the amount of such damage is the Plaintiff, who is the victim of the claim for damages (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Da57100, Mar. 11, 1994; 2010Da18850, Jul. 28, 2011). The Plaintiff is liable for proving the property condition that would have existed without the illegal act and the property condition after the illegal act became effective (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da26515, Dec. 13, 2012).

2) Determination on the instant case

However, in light of the above legal principles, property damage caused by a tort is limited to property disadvantage caused by an illegal harmful act. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to the monthly salary and salary for four months due to the Defendant’s deception, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. Requests for agreements, such as daily allowances for work;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Defendant agreed to pay KRW 600,000 to the Plaintiff, and received KRW 300,000 from the Plaintiff as material costs. However, the Defendant did not pay KRW 600,000 to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total sum of 600,000 won and damages for delay.

B. Determination

On June 5, 2017, the Defendant: “If the Defendant sent 300,000 won to B, the said money will be used as the purchase cost for the material for the material for the electrical equipment and the daily distance equivalent to KRW 300,000 as the material for the electrical equipment purchased will be followed additionally. It would be noted that the Defendant deceivings the Plaintiff by sending KRW 300,000 to B. It would be as seen earlier.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the defendant agreed to pay KRW 600,000 to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 60,000 won the sum of the agreed amount and 600,000 won per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings until June 11, 2020, which is the first day of the judgment of the court of first instance, to the extent that the defendant's dispute over the existence of the obligation or the scope of the obligation is reasonable from February 20, 2018, following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, as requested by the plaintiff.

4. Claims for mental compensation.

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff did not seek a normal job due to the Defendant’s deception and did so for a considerable period of time according to the Defendant’s direction. As such, the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress, the Defendant is obliged to pay consolation money of KRW 30,000,000 and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

(b) Markets:

The facts that the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2,00,00 as the Seoggu District Court Branch 2018 High Court Branch 2018 High-Ma81 due to the Defendant’s deception by deceiving the Plaintiff are as seen earlier. Furthermore, according to the evidence No. 5, the Plaintiff’s deception on September 6, 2017 can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff started to receive severe stress due to the Defendant’s deception and undergo a mental treatment.

According to the above facts of recognition, since the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering due to the defendant's illegal act, the defendant has a duty to compensate for the mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff in money.

Considering the relationship, motive, degree of damage, etc. between the plaintiff and the defendant, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant in relation to the illegal act as KRW 5,00,00

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 5,00,000 won for mental damages caused by tort and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act until June 11, 2020, which is the date of the first instance judgment, and 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is the next day to the date of full payment, as requested by the plaintiff, from February 20, 2018 following the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case as requested by the plaintiff as a result of the completion of the tort.

5. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified with this conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.