beta
Text
1. Defendant C’s KRW 90,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from November 14, 2014 to September 30, 2015, respectively, to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1-3 and Eul evidence No. 2, the plaintiff remitted KRW 20,000,000 to the defendant Nonghyup Bank account as of September 2, 2012. The plaintiff remitted KRW 20,000 to the defendant Eul Bank account as of July 19, 2013 and KRW 46,50,000 as of August 19, 2013, and the defendant Eul promised to repay KRW 90,000,000 to the plaintiff on October 10, 2014 ( KRW 30,000,000,000 until October 30, 2014; KRW 30,000,000 to the plaintiff's new bank account as of July 19, 2013; and the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff promised to repay up to 30,00,000,000 won until January 30, 2014).
(2) The defendant C alleged that he paid not less than KRW 40,000 to the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it).
According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 90,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 20% per annum from November 14, 2014 to September 30, 2015, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment.
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is Defendant C’s ancillary, and Defendant B is a person who runs a lifelong educational establishment business, a content development and sale business, and an online shopping mall in the name of “G” from Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.
Defendant B is a representative of a juristic person who actually operates the above business, and Defendant C is a joint businessman or an agent of Defendant B.
On May 2012, the Defendants, upon investing KRW 100,000,00 in the G business, recommended the Plaintiff to make an investment by explaining to the effect that the Plaintiff may directly conduct education, lending, sale, etc. in the name of the investors in one of the curriculum developed by the Company, and the principal shall also be guaranteed.
The Plaintiff invested the said money, but the Defendants.