logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.05.03 2015나2037663
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same part of the judgment of the court of first instance as that of the defendant, except for the amended part as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The amended part of the judgment of the court of first instance reveals that the 33th 9th 9th 11th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1st

Considering the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 3-1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 27-1, 27-2, and Gap's evidence Nos. 58 through 62, and the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, K and Eul, etc., upon promoting a so-called "cultural marketing" business establishing a gallon of the name of "M" in the F Savings Bank's private house around February 2008, have the defendant entrust the defendant with the operation of gallon. However, the defendant seems to have violated the prohibition on credit extension for the large shareholder's lineal descendant, and if the defendant borrowed the name of CA, the head of the F Savings Bank's publicity office, and had the defendant actually registered the loan in the form of Mallon's representative, and had the defendant manage and operate the above gallon's property under the name of the CA and the defendant actually purchased the above gallon's management and operation of the gallon's loan.

In addition, according to each of the above evidences, the defendant can not operate gallons directly at the bank, so K and AB, etc.

arrow