logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.01.29 2013다92118
부당이득금반환
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal against Defendant C, D, E, G, K, and L

A. Article 760(3) of the Civil Act considers an aided person to be a joint tortfeasor and imposes joint tort liability on the aided person.

Assistance refers to all direct and indirect acts that facilitate tort. Aiding and abetting by negligence is possible in the area of civil law in which negligence is the same as that of an intentional act, in principle, for the purpose of compensating for damages. In this case, the content of negligence refers to a violation of the duty of care on the premise that there is a duty of care not to assist a tort.

However, in order to be held liable for joint tort as an negligent aiding and abetting another person’s tort, a proximate causal relationship between the aiding and abetting act and the occurrence of damages by the victim’s tort should be acknowledged. In determining whether a proximate causal relationship exists, the reasonable causal relationship should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the probability of predictability of the circumstances that facilitate the relevant tort by negligence, the impact of the act by negligence on the occurrence of damages, the degree of contribution to the formation of the victim’s trust, and the degree of contribution to the victim’s own

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da91597, Mar. 27, 2014). Meanwhile, Article 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act prohibits the transfer of a means of access in an electronic financial transaction, such as an electronic card or password, such as a cash card, and provides for punishing the act of violation in principle. This is to ensure the stability and trust of an electronic financial transaction by preventing a transaction that is not transparent due to a person other than a deposit account holder’s name and another person’s electronic financial transaction.

However, electronic financial transactions are conducted.

arrow