logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.03.23 2017가단61265
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Defendant E is jointly with Defendant E and jointly with the Plaintiff KRW 128,522,912, and Defendant C is either KRW 102,818,329, out of the above amount.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs wholesale and retail business, such as pipes and steel products, and Defendant B works as the Plaintiff’s employee from April 2004 to July 15, 2015 and was in charge of the management, supply, accounting, etc. of piping materials.

In addition, Defendant C is an individual entrepreneur who performs the duties of manufacturing and installing industrial machinery, painting facilities, steel structure, etc., and the representative of Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”).

B. Defendant B proposed that the president of the business partners, including Defendant C, trade piping materials, such as valves, lectures, and steel plates, at a price lower than the market price, and Defendant C consented thereto, Defendant C sold piping materials owned by the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff C was sold to Defendant C at a price lower than the market price.

C. Defendant B was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the following facts: “The purchase cost of the materials sold by Defendant B was KRW 128,522,912 (the purchase cost based on the purchase price under the name of Defendant D is KRW 91,515,62,62) of the materials sold by Defendant B in the appellate court, and the lower judgment was reversed by the appellate court and sentenced to one year and nine months of imprisonment with prison labor.”

In addition, Defendant C acquired stolen goods by negligence in the course of business by purchasing the instant materials from Defendant B, with the intention of selling them at a lower price than the purchase cost, by neglecting his duty of care as to whether they are stolen or not.

‘' was recognized as criminal facts.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above fact of recognition of damages liability, Defendant B shall be liable for damages.

arrow