beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 39,060,00 and KRW 3,200,00 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 16,60,000 from June 30, 2016, and KRW 16,60,00.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff Company is a company engaged in the business of supplying goods to the Plaintiff Company E, which is a cooperation company with the Japanese company (Korean general sales agency) and D (hereinafter “D”). The Defendant is a person who has been in charge of the Plaintiff Company’s business from April 2015 to February 2017, transaction with C, domestic sales of the products supplied by C, and sales of the products supplied by C, and sales of D related goods.
B. On July 11, 2019, the Defendant was convicted of occupational breach of trust of Suwon District Court 2019Kadan551 due to the following criminal facts. On July 11, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years of imprisonment and a conviction of 120 hours of community service order from the above court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is.
The defendant has been working as the head of the plaintiff company from April 2015 to February 2017 and has been engaged in transactions with the company of the plaintiff company and sales in Korea of products supplied by the company of the Japanese company C.
Plaintiff
Since the company entered into a domestic monopoly sales agency contract with the company, the defendant has a duty to accurately notify the other party to the transaction and terms and conditions so that the company can sell the products supplied to the company in Korea at a reasonable price so that it can sell them normally.
Nevertheless, around April 2016, the Defendant proposed that “The parts to be manufactured in C shall be supplied from the Plaintiff Company to F, and if the orderer would be supplied at a higher price to the orderer, then the latter would be divided.” The above G approved the Defendant’s proposal.
1. On June 2016, the Defendant in breach of trust in business around June 2016 violated his/her occupational duties as seen above, and thus, “40 products of CRS-6322-4930 H 400 and CR-6322-495H products 400 samples from the Plaintiff’s representative director.