logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.07.14 2015나31053
손해배상(기)
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

The reasoning of this court's decision is as follows, in addition to the part of the judgment of the defendant on the defendant's argument stated in the 2nd page 17 through No. 3rd page 8 of the first instance court's decision, it is identical to the entry of the first instance court's decision, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

【The Defendant asserts that 51 million won paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is not the money invested by the Plaintiff in order to promote reconstruction projects, but the money loaned to the Defendant, and even if it is the money loaned, 25 million won out of the above money was borrowed by D rather than the Defendant. Even if a civil trial is not bound by the fact-finding in a criminal trial, the fact finding the Defendant guilty of the same fact-finding is a flexible evidence, and unless there are special circumstances where it is deemed difficult to adopt a criminal judgment in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, the facts opposed thereto cannot be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da9621, May 28, 1996). As to this case, as seen earlier, it cannot be found that the Defendant obtained the Plaintiff’s intent or ability to repay in the relevant criminal trial and submitted the final judgment to the Defendant to the said KRW 51 million,000,000,000 for 1 million and 200,000 won.

In addition, the following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff directly remitted the amount of KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account, i.e., “B is the general affairs of the redevelopment partnership C, and the amount of KRW 50 million to be used by the redevelopment association after 20 days from the business entity that agreed to enter into an agreement for the business rights with the Plaintiff,” upon hearing the statement that “B is the principal affairs of the redevelopment association,” and 3 days from the business entity that agreed to enter into an agreement for the business rights with the Plaintiff.

arrow