beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The plaintiff asserts that C took part in the acquisition of money by deceiving the plaintiff, and that the defendant took part in the method of receiving money from the plaintiff to his account under his name, and sought payment of KRW 200 million as compensation for tort against the defendant.
On August 20, 2014, in the course of soliciting C to make a high profit by investing in the Plaintiff’s shares, the Defendant’s motion picture on August 20, 2014 was transmitted to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, accordingly,
9.3.0 to 9.00
9. The fact that during the period between September 22, 2014, the Defendant remitted a total of KRW 200 million to the Defendant’s account designated by C; the Defendant associated with C during the period from 2013 to 2014; and the period of residence at C’s mother’s house during a certain period of time (However, the Defendant asserts that the period of teaching with C does not coincide with the period of living at C’s mother’s house); and the fact that the name of the vehicle registered at C’s mother’s office and C’s mother’s office transferred to D on September 24, 2014 that the Defendant’s mother’s name of the vehicle transferred to D does not conflict between the parties, or on June 23, 2015;
7.2. The results of each inquiry inquiry report by the head of Seodaemun-gu and the fact inquiry report by the head of Seodaemun-gu. However, the above fact-finding alone cannot be readily concluded that the defendant participated in the tort C, and even if it is based on the whole proof of the plaintiff, it is insufficient to recognize it.
(O) According to the statement in Eul 2 and 3 and the result of the Financial Transaction Information Meeting dated June 30, 2015 by the head of the Korea CFF Consumer Finance Business Department, the defendant is recognized to hold the claim of KRW 36.5 million against C on June 11, 2014. In light of the defendant's position, the above KRW 200 million may have been thought to have been remitted for payment as asserted by the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed for lack of good cause. It is so decided as per Disposition.