logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.04.28 2015나36512
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial are all dismissed.

2. Demanding and expanding the costs of appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is that the reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment as to defendant B

A. (1) Defendant B, at the F office on May 26, 2009, made a false statement as if he would give priority to the Plaintiff, and caused the Plaintiff to join the instant association as a member of the association, and received KRW 60 million under the name of the association and KRW 20 million under the name of the premium for the membership of the association in the same place. The Defendant B conspired with M or by aiding and abetting M to commit the crime of M, thereby deceiving the Plaintiff and causing damages equivalent to the Plaintiff, etc. Therefore, Defendant B is liable to compensate for this.

(2) Paragraph (2) of the ground for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance

B. Since it is the same as the entry, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. (1) The Plaintiff’s claim is based on Articles 401-2 and 399(1) of the Commercial Act, asserting that Defendant B’s liability under the Commercial Act was asserted by the Plaintiff, but Article 399 of the Commercial Act is a director’s liability provision for damages to the company. The content of the Plaintiff’s claim is deemed to refer to Article 401(1) of the Commercial Act, since Defendant B is liable for damages to the Plaintiff who is a third party as a director of F. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is based on Article 401(1) of the Commercial Act.

Defendant B was negligent in performing his duties intentionally or by gross negligence while using the F’s position as a director, and thus, Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff as a third party.

(2) Article 401(1) of the Commercial Act, if a director has neglected to perform his/her duties in bad faith or by gross negligence, that director shall be a third party.

arrow