beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff with KRW 14.5 million and with respect thereto, 5% per annum from June 22, 2014 to October 5, 2014.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Defendant C is a person who engages in the secondary sales business with the trade name of “E” in the secondary D Building, and Defendant B is a secondary and secondary dealer employed by Defendant C.
B. Even if Defendant B received the purchase price from the Plaintiff, he/she was found guilty of imprisonment with prison labor for six months as of October 21, 2014, with labor for the following reasons: (a) on June 18, 2014, Defendant B, on the ground that he/she received a total of KRW 26,50,000 from the Plaintiff to his/her account and acquired the purchase price from the Plaintiff, by transfer from the Plaintiff to his/her account, by paying the purchase price of the vehicle to the borrower and having the Plaintiff acquire the ownership of the vehicle; (b) on June 18, 2014, Defendant B was found guilty of imprisonment with labor for a period of six months from June 17, 2014.
C. On October 27, 2014, Defendant B paid KRW 12 million to the Plaintiff, and on the same day, Defendant B agreed to not later raise an objection against the said criminal case between the Plaintiff and Defendant B (hereinafter “instant agreement”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, and the purport of all pleadings
2. Defendant B’s defense prior to the merits of this case agreed that the Plaintiff was paid KRW 12 million and did not raise an objection. Thus, Defendant B’s defense to the effect that the instant lawsuit filed in violation of the above subordinate claim agreement is unlawful.
In the course of investigation or criminal trial against the perpetrator of a tort, where the victim agreed that he/she shall not be punished against the perpetrator by receiving the money in the name of agreement from the perpetrator, it shall be reasonable to deem that the money was paid as part of the compensation for damages (property damage) unless there are circumstances such as clearly stating that the amount received at the time of agreement is paid as consolation money.
Supreme Court Decision 23 February 23, 2001