(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.02.21 2016나9672 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.02.21 2016나9672

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 11, 2003, the Plaintiff employed C as D’s employee as the operator of the luminous drugs selling company with the trade name “D.”

B. When the Plaintiff is employed as employee C, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of fidelity Guarantee and Financial Guarantee with the Defendant as follows:

1) A written fidelity guarantee (hereinafter “instant fidelity guarantee”)

(C) The above person (C) is a person whose ideas are sound and good conduct, and if there occurs any problem arising from embezzlement of public funds during his or her official duties, he or she will be responsible for all the issues related to civil and criminal liability. 2) The financial guarantee document (hereinafter “instant financial guarantee document”) (hereinafter “instant financial guarantee document”) is supplied with goods from his or her or his or her or her or its sales to the consumers, etc., thereby incurring property damage due to his or her failure to pay the sales proceeds, and his or her or her signature is affixed thereon.

Documents to be attached:

1. Two joint and several sureties for a certificate of the personal seal impression;

C. C used the price of goods, etc. for personal use during the period of work in D, and on October 1, 2008, “21,243,263 won used for personal use” to the Plaintiff until December 30, 2009. ‘The statement of non-performance of obligation and the statement of repayment of obligation are prepared.”

C died on October 10, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 5, purport of whole pleading

2. Summary of the original defendant's assertion

A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is jointly and severally liable for damages inflicted upon the Defendant by embezzlement of the sales proceeds, etc. through the instant financial guarantee document, and that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to C’s embezzlement to the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff only provided a personal guarantee to the Plaintiff, and that there was no joint and several sureties or financial guarantee.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.09.21 2016가단6753

-대전지방법원서산지원 2016.10.26 2016가단2705

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.31 2017나30631

-수원지방법원 2015.06.10 2015고단1586

-수원지방법원 2019.01.23 2017가합22189