beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant managed Fmnamera 4S (hereinafter “instant passenger car”) purchased by D Co., Ltd. E with financial leasing.
B. On May 17, 2016, C loaned money to the Plaintiff as security, and received KRW 25,000,000 from the Plaintiff to the account in the name of the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 11, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. In the center of the plaintiff's argument, since the defendant committed an illegal act by deceiving the plaintiff jointly with C, the defendant is obligated to pay 25,000,000 won, which is obtained by deceiving the plaintiff with C, jointly with C.
Preliminaryly, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 25,000,000 to the Defendant’s account, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 25,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
3. Determination
A. First of all, we examine whether the defendant committed a tort by deceiving the plaintiff by deceiving the plaintiff jointly with C, and according to each of the above evidence, the defendant lent his account in his name to C, and provided documents related to the automobile of this case, but it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant was involved in the act of defraudation of C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
Rather, according to the statements in Gap evidence 11 and Eul evidence 4, the defendant only provided the automobile of this case as security upon the Eul's request while keeping the automobile of this case by building the car of this case from G, and C alone acquired the above money from the plaintiff.
Therefore, the plaintiff's primary argument is without merit.
B. Furthermore, as seen earlier, the fact that the Defendant lent money from the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff remitted money KRW 25,00,000 to the Defendant’s account, but on the other hand, the Defendant only lent money to C, and such fact alone is that the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant.