beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The grounds for the claim are as shown in the attached Form;
2. Determination
A. The Plaintiff asserts that tort liability due to an unfair criminal complaint is established on the premise that the Defendant, based on false facts, filed a criminal complaint against the Plaintiff in Seoul Dong District Prosecutors' Office for the purpose of having the Plaintiff subject to criminal punishment. However, as pointed out by the Defendant, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant filed a criminal complaint against the Plaintiff as a crime of fraud, and therefore, the fact that the Defendant filed a criminal complaint on the ground that D, E, and the Plaintiff conspired in collusion with Nonparty F, and the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of G special ownership.
The above assertion is without merit for further review.
B. 1) Whether the Defendant is liable for tort due to unfair provisional seizure: (a) as alleged by the Plaintiff, filed an application for provisional seizure against the Plaintiff for the damage claim against the Plaintiff as the preserved claim against the Plaintiff; and (b) the fact that the Defendant received the decision of provisional seizure against real estate by the Seoul Eastern District Court 2015Kadan3152 on August 19, 2015 is no dispute between the parties; and (b) even if the provisional seizure against the above provisional seizure is deemed as an unfair provisional seizure against the Plaintiff, there is no evidence to prove that the above provisional seizure was incurred by the conclusion of a sales contract for the above real estate and the execution of the above provisional seizure as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no ground to deem that the above provisional seizure was unjustifiable in the case of the request for provisional seizure against E and D.
The above assertion on a different premise is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition.