logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.16 2017가단6977
손해배상 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 15, 2015, the Plaintiff received a call from a nameless winner who is called the director of Nonghyup (hereinafter referred to as “nameless winner”) to allow a loan to increase credit rating on the same day to receive up to 12,00,000 won by lending money from another financial right. The Plaintiff, on October 15, 2015, remitted KRW 12,00,000 to the account in Defendant B’s name, and KRW 25,00,000 to the SC Bank account in Defendant C’s name on October 16, 2015, and KRW 5,000,000 to the post office account in Defendant D’s name (hereinafter referred to as “instant criminal act”).

B. Meanwhile, Defendant B, from a person referred to as F Company G, may borrow up to KRW 30,00,00 from a person who is called the F Company G. However, Defendant B, after hearing the phrase “as it is difficult to obtain a loan due to low credit rating, he has to accumulate the results of the deposit and withdrawal in order to enhance the credit rating,” and opened an account number.

Around October 15, 2015, Defendant B met a man with no name, and Defendant B’s statement from a person called G that “I would have withdrawn money to a person accompanying him/her so that he/she could have deposited money,” and withdrawn KRW 12,000,000 to that male.

C. In addition, Defendant C: (a) heard the phrase “to receive and withdraw money from the account through a credit service provider and to create a transaction statement in the manner of making it possible for H Bank employees to make a sunlight loan; and (b) released the money deposited into the account in the SC Japan bank account; and (c) delivered it to the winners.

Defendant D will lend a 'boom' card to a police officer in October 2015.

“The” sent a e-mail card connected to the post office account after telephone.

E. As above, the Defendants were investigated under criminal suspicion that they transferred the means of access to electronic finance, but all were subject to a decision that there was no suspicion.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1-B.

arrow