beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. 1) The Future Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “BS Savings Bank”)
(2) On May 6, 2012, the Financial Services Commission was declared bankrupt on April 30, 201, the Plaintiff was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy of the future savings bank in accordance with the Depositor Protection Act on the same day, from March 6, 200 to September 30, 201, as a juristic person established under the Mutual Savings and Finance Act for the purpose of mutual credit fraternity business, credit installment savings business, receipt of deposits and installment savings, and lending of funds. On May 6, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court was declared bankrupt on April 30, 201, and the Plaintiff was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy of the future savings bank in accordance with the Depositor Protection Act. (2) B) from March 6, 200 to September 30, 201, while serving as C or D of the future
(1) In carrying out loans to Han Ho Construction Co., Ltd. on August 14, 2006, despite the duty of due care or loyalty to take measures to preserve claims, such as examining the borrower’s ability to repay obligations in accordance with the relevant statutes and the standards of mutual savings banks, and securing adequate human and material security for the repayment of obligations, the borrower incurred a loss of KRW 2 billion to the future savings bank by neglecting such duty.
(2) On May 21, 2008, when granting a loan to the Republic of Korea Ltd. and Libya Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Republic of the Philippines has the duty of due care or loyalty to take measures to preserve claims, such as examining the borrower's ability to repay obligations objectively and closely, securing adequate human and material security for the repayment of obligations, etc. In particular, despite the duty of due care to do not exceed the limit of individual borrower loans prohibited by the Mutual Savings Banks Act, each of the above loans was extended to the business of the Republic of Korea casino of the Philippines, and thus is in violation of the provisions prohibiting individual borrower loans from exceeding the limit of loans.