In the case of borrowing money at a rate higher than the deposit interest rate of the cooperative at the village treasury and issuing a periodical deposit certificate, the legal relationship

In a case where the representative and the director of a village credit cooperative borrowed money from the plaintiff under the intention of using it as funds for the operation of the Gu sales office operated by the credit cooperative, the amount of interest higher than the deposit interest rate of the credit cooperative shall be equal to the loan, and even if the certificate of a regular deposit was prepared and delivered to the plaintiff, it shall not be deemed as a deposit and shall be deemed as a tort on the part of the representative of the corporation. Therefore, the village credit cooperative is liable to compensate for it. However, as the plaintiff with a regular deposit experience, who is a plaintiff with a regular deposit of money, is well aware of the process of the credit and the interest of the village credit cooperative's business, and suffers the above damage by borrowing the above money with the belief of the above representative, etc. that it is relatively high interest, and thus the plaintiff

Article 35(1) of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff, Appellant] 19 August 19, 1975, 75Da666 (Article 35(4)214 of the Civil Act, Canada 10999, house 23 ②BB0, Gong52229, Gong629)

Plaintiff

Depository of the common village;

Chuncheon District Court's original Branch (81 Gohap206, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Among the parts against the defendant in the original judgment, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against that part shall be dismissed

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff an amount of KRW 2,790,000 and KRW 1,890,000 from September 17, 1981 to the amount of KRW 900,000 with an annual rate of KRW 5% from September 28, 1981 to the date of full payment.

All of the costs of lawsuit shall be ten divided into the first and second instances, and such nine shall be borne by the defendant, and the remainder by the plaintiff.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff an amount of KRW 3,100,000 and KRW 2,100,000,000 each year from September 17, 1981; and for KRW 1,00,000,000 each year from September 28, 1981.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant and provisional execution declaration

The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against that part shall be dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff in the first and second instances.

The plaintiff asserts that (1) on August 16, 1980, the plaintiff's interest rate of KRW 2,100,000 shall be 30 percent per annum; (2) on September 16, 1981, the date of return shall be 1,00,000 won per annum; and (3) on October 27, 1980, the date of return shall be 30% per annum; and (4) on October 27, 1981, the date of return shall be 30% per annum; and even on October 27, 1981, the date of return shall be 3,100,000 won has not been returned to the plaintiff after the date of return; and therefore, the plaintiff's claim that the plaintiff deposited the above money to the defendant village credit cooperative and received the above money from the plaintiff as part of the loan credit business by the plaintiff was not accepted as evidence by the plaintiff's director or the defendant village credit cooperative, which is the plaintiff's director.

However, since the plaintiff's representative or director of the defendant village saving association incurred losses to the plaintiff, the defendant village saving association is liable for the damages incurred to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant village saving association's 1, Eul's certificate No. 1, Eul's certificate No. 6-1, and Eul's certificate No. 2, Eul's certificate No. 2, and the defendant village saving association's testimony No. 2 and 3 (each regular deposit certificate), which are recognized as being issued by the non-party 1 and 3's testimony of the court below, the non-party 1's testimony of the above non-party 2 and the non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's company's.

Thus, as the representative of the defendant village cooperative, the non-party 2 is the director of the defendant village cooperative, and the non-party 1, as the director of the defendant village cooperative, borrowed money from the plaintiff on his duties to use it as operating funds and used it as operating funds, and thus, the non-party 2 incurred losses to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant village cooperative is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff pursuant to Article 35 (1) of the Civil Act.

Meanwhile, according to each of the above evidence, the plaintiff himself is a person who has been regularly deposited money in the defendant village credit cooperative and was well aware of the defendant village credit cooperative's credit, the process of receiving the money, interest rate, etc., and is able to recognize the fact that he suffered damages as above by lending money to his members as above by believing that the defendant village credit cooperative's loan to the defendant village credit cooperative's loan to his members, such as the above statements, even though he was well aware of the defendant village credit cooperative's credit, the process of receiving the money and interest rate, etc., so it is reasonable to take this into account in determining the amount of damages that the defendant village credit cooperative should compensate the plaintiff as to the amount of damages that the defendant village credit cooperative should compensate for to the plaintiff as of August 16, 1980. The defendant village credit cooperative should compensate the plaintiff 1,890,000 won out of the amount of money 2,100,000 won borrowed by the non-party 2 on October 17, 1980.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages at the rate of 5% per annum from September 17, 1981 to September 28, 1981 with respect to the total amount of KRW 2,790,000 and KRW 1,890,000 among the above amounts, and from September 28, 1981 to the full payment date (the initial date of each damages for delay shall be the rate of 5% per annum from the date of tort). Since each of the above damages for delay shall be the plaintiff's claim after the date of tort, and the above interest rate for delay after January 10, 1982, which is clear from the date of delivery, is the next day of this case, and it is reasonable for the defendant to dispute about the existence or scope of this case's damages for delay after January 10, 1982, it shall be subject to the interest rate of the Civil Procedure Act under Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and shall be dismissed as to the remaining part of the defendant's appeal.

Judges Yoon Sang-ho (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge)