logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.01.30 2014가합374
손해배상
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 63,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from April 28, 2011 to January 30, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant came to know at the Edridton Association around November 2009.

B. The Defendant was a branch office of a corporation C, a corporation established for the purpose of collecting non-performing loans, and was an employee of corporation D (hereinafter “D”) established for the purpose of securing funds for purchase of non-performing loans.

C. On October 11, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) recommended the Defendant to make an investment to the effect that “the company accompanying in Korea has purchased non-performing loans at low prices; (b) may make profits from 18% per annum; and (c) transferred KRW 8 million per annum to the national bank account (Account Number E) in the name of D on the same day; and (d) KRW 5 million per annum around the 14th day of the same month for each investment; (b) was solicited to make an investment under the above conditions as above and remitted KRW 13 million for the said account; and (c) on April 27, 2011, the Plaintiff received an annual investment in KRW 20 million from the Defendant to make an investment; and (d) was urged to receive KRW 160 million per annum from the Defendant on April 27, 2011.

The Defendant was charged with the charge (the name of a crime: a violation of the Act on the Regulation of Fraud and Unauthorized Receipt of Money) that he/she received KRW 126 million from the Plaintiff as the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 2012 Go-Ma1935, and conspired with the representative director, etc. of D in collusion with the Plaintiff to receive money as investment money. On November 8, 2013, the above court found the Defendant guilty on the charge of violating the Act on the Regulation of Unauthorized Receipt of Money, and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 3 million. The above judgment became final and conclusive through the appellate court (Seoul East District Court 2013No1440).

arrow