beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Plaintiff’s assertion
The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's employee C shall compensate for damages totaling KRW 240 million of the face value of the bill suffered by the plaintiff due to the plaintiff's fraud or embezzlement, since the plaintiff's employee C shall exchange for cash or extend the payment date of the promissory note 100 million per face value of the bill issued by the defendant, and acquired it by fraudulent means, or by embezzlement by refusing to return the above promissory note delivered for the extension of cash exchange or payment date.
Judgment
The facts D, around July 2012, at the request of the Defendant to discount the Plaintiff at a discount of KRW 70 million per face value of the Defendant’s issuance of the Promissory Notes at KRW 70 million, and endorsed it as the first endorsement on July 18, 2012, and the Defendant paid cash prior to the due date and recovered the Promissory Notes.
After that, D received two copies of the Promissory Notes, the face value of which is KRW 40 million from the Defendant, and the face value of which is KRW 100 million issued by the Defendant, and endorsed as the first endorsement on August 10, 2012, and requested the payment date to C through E on September 3, 2012.
However, C discounted the bill of KRW 40 million to F, but the bill of KRW 10 million was not discounted, but the bill of KRW 100 million was not discounted.
D, with C and F on August 29, 2012, at the defendant's office, offered the defendant's certificate of the right to registration of apartment buildings owned by D and the G lease contract for D operation as security, and requested the loan of KRW 240 million, and returned KRW 100 million received from C and KRW 40 million received from F.
【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, the evidence Nos. 3 and 4-1, 2, 3, 1, 3, and 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3, the witness D’s testimony, part of the witness C’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the above evidence and the whole purport of the arguments, the statement that D and C stolen the bill of this case was reversed.