beta
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. On May 17, 2018, the gist of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim: (a) the Plaintiff deposited KRW 38,50,000 into the account of community credit cooperatives under Defendant C’s name in order to enter the formal transaction details with Defendant C; (b) immediately thereafter, Defendant C agreed to return to the Plaintiff; (c) the account of community credit cooperatives was already transferred KRW 38,50,000 to Defendant C; and (d) the said account was already attached upon Defendant B’s request, based on the seizure collection order; and (c) on May 17, 2018, Defendant B acquired the said money upon receiving an order for all of the deposit claims.
Even if Defendant C received money from the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff did not intend to return the money and had the Plaintiff deposit KRW 38.5 million into the account. Defendant B knowingly participated in the act of defraudation by Defendant C and acquired profits by receiving an order of deposit claims.
Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable for damages of KRW 38.5 million incurred by the plaintiff due to the above fraud as joint tortfeasor.
2. Although collecting the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, it is insufficient to prove that Defendant C agreed to immediately return the said evidence to the Plaintiff and received KRW 38.5 million from the Plaintiff, and that Defendant C received KRW 38.5 million from the Plaintiff with the intent to acquire by fraud.
In addition, it is also insufficient to prove that Defendant B participated in the act of defraudation by Defendant C and acquired the above 38.5 million won interest with the seizure of claims and orders in whole.
The fact that a seizure collection order for Defendant C’s deposit claim was served by public notice to Defendant C, the debtor, is significant in this court. In light of the fact that it is difficult to readily conclude that Defendant C knew that the account of community credit cooperatives was seized around May 17, 2018, Defendant C knew that it was the seized account, Defendant C’s intent to acquire money should be inferred solely based on the fact that the account was seized at the time.