beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,720,241 as well as annual 5% from August 29, 2015 to June 14, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant is a person who served as the plaintiff's auditor.
Around October 23, 2009, the Defendant purchased C’s Grandland Corresponding (hereinafter referred to as “Kanman Corresponding”) under the name of the Plaintiff, and received a loan of KRW 20 million from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Monithing”) as the vehicle purchase fund.
B. Around November 13, 2009, the Defendant purchased Dangerous Car under the name of E in-house director of the Plaintiff at the time, and borrowed KRW 22,90,000 from Hyundai Capital as the vehicle purchase fund.
C. The Defendant sold the car knife and knife car to a third party.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 4, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant forged a motor vehicle sales contract, a loan application, and purchased a knife car and sold it to a third party by using the Plaintiff or E’s seal imprint, etc. (2) The Plaintiff was in arrears with the payment of the principal and interest of knife loan from Hyundai Capital; and (3) it was inevitable to pay the principal and interest of knife loan due to the fact that knife would be registered as a bad credit holder
In addition, E paid the principal and interest of a passenger car with low credit rating due to the bad credit standing of E as the representative of the plaintiff.
3) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return the principal and interest of a car paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment. (B) The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) purchased a vehicle in the name of E and the Plaintiff under the name of E with the consent of the Plaintiff’s representative, and paid the principal and interest of the vehicle.
2 The defendant is obligated to return the amount paid by the plaintiff out of the principal and interest of the Kanman's loan purchased in the name of the plaintiff, but the vehicle purchased in the name of E.