beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 100 million and the Plaintiff’s annual amount of KRW 5% from February 11, 2014 to April 24, 2014.
Reasons
1. Following the facts of recognition are deemed to have been led to the confession between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, and there is no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company, or it may be acknowledged by taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings in the entries of the evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including the virtual number).
Around September 2013, Defendant B, who was working as an insurance solicitor of the Defendant Company, provided that “B’s performance was within the third category in the ASEAN Life Insurance Co., Ltd., but only to a designer with good performance, provided an opportunity to invest KRW 600 million with incentives, and paid interest at 12% per annum on the investment amount. The remainder of the distributed KRW 600,000 is not less than KRW 100,000,000,000.”
B. On September 10, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to Defendant B’s account as an investment deposit.
C. Meanwhile, Defendant B was indicted for the charge of deceiving the Plaintiff and deceiving the Plaintiff KRW 100 million, and was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with labor for the Incheon District Court No. 2014Da4512, 5400 (combined) and was pending in the appellate court as of the present Incheon District Court No. 2014No4551.
2. Determination
A. Judgment on deemed confessions as to Defendant B (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)
B. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant B, an employee as an insurance solicitor of the Defendant Company, acquired KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff as an investment money. As such, the Defendant Company is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the amount obtained by deception pursuant to Article 102 of the Insurance Business Act or Article 756 of the Civil Act. 2) The provision “in the course of soliciting” under Article 102(1) of the Insurance Business Act, which is “in the course of soliciting”, is not itself an insurance solicitor’s act, even if it is not itself, it is closely related or similar to the act of soliciting insurance solicitors by objectively considering the external observation of the act.