beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a company that runs the business of ship electrical construction, machinery manufacturing equipment, etc., and C is employed by the Defendant from July 2015 to work as the director in charge of accounting, and is engaged in managing the Defendant’s deposit account and the Defendant’s authorized certificate, passbook, etc. while managing the Defendant’s authorized certificate, passbook, etc.
B. Upon receiving a request from C to lend the Defendant’s operating funds, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20,000,000 to the account (Account Number F) in the Defendant’s name on May 31, 2018 (hereinafter “the instant money”).
C. Upon the deposit of the instant money, C paid the said money four times in the name of the loan class system, representative, etc., and KRW 2,00,000 among them was remitted to G in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and the remainder was remitted to H in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.
C was prosecuted for embezzlement suspicion (including a sum of KRW 14,00,00,000, which was remitted to the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. among the above transfer details), and on October 18, 2018, the Changwon District Court embezzled KRW 1,947,91,657 in total from July 30, 2015 to June 7, 2018 by the Defendant, etc. to use for personal debt repayment and illegal Internet gambling funds, etc. from July 30, 2015 to June 7, 2018. The judgment was finalized on April 4, 2018.
(Reasons for recognition) / [Attachment] 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 14 evidence (if any, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) of Changwon District Court 2018, 106. / [Grounds for recognition] / 3,00 each statement of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's main defense
A. The main point of this defense is that the defendant knew of the fact that the lawsuit was in progress, and thus the defendant is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit.
Therefore, since the defendant was negligent in failing to observe the appeal period, the appeal of this case is unlawful.
(b).