beta
Text
The defendant shall calculate 3,06,00 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from June 3, 2020 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The plaintiff is the subject of each successful bidder as seen below, and the defendant is the source of won.
B. On February 15, 2017, the date of commencement, and October 15, 2018, the date of completion, as well as the successful bidder’s bid amounting to KRW 50 million, and ② on July 29, 2017, the date of commencement, and on March 29, 2019, the date of completion, and on March 29, 2019, and KRW 50 million, the Defendant subscribed to each of the instant successful bidders (hereinafter “each of the instant successful bidders”).
C. The Defendant did not pay the fraternity upon receiving each of the following amounts from the successful bidder of the instant case.
(1) The successful bid amount of KRW 18,613,00 on June 15, 2017, (2) the successful bid amount of KRW 23,50,000 on June 15, 2017, and KRW 24,963,00 on December 29, 2017.
D. Meanwhile, the Defendant, on March 27, 2019, entered a successful bid for the cause of KRW 10,510,000,000, which was the first day of the Plaintiff’s succession, and subsequently, paid to the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 10,510,00,00,000, which was the date of the Plaintiff’s succession. The Plaintiff is the person who appropriated the said amount for the unpaid amount prior to the said unpaid amount.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total amount of KRW 3,066,00 ( KRW 18,613,000, KRW 24,963,000 - KRW 10,510,00) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from June 3, 2020 to the date of complete payment, as claimed by the plaintiff.
B. As to this, the Defendant embezzled part of the deposit money.
Although it is alleged to the effect that the Defendant entered into a mutual aid agreement for the unpaid accounts upon receiving investment funds from the Defendant, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit, as there is no other evidence to acknowledge it solely with the statement of No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's objection.