beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 260,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from January 30, 2016 to April 11, 2016, as well as for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. (1) On April 30, 2008, D deposited KRW 500 million at the Kimpo Livestock Industry Cooperatives (hereinafter “Mapo Livestock Industry Cooperatives”) E branch, which the Plaintiff had worked as the branch office, for one year, and opened a regular deposit account in the name of C, one’s own household. From April 30, 2009 to May 3, 201, from April 30, 2009 to May 3, 201, D deposited the said KRW 500 million in order at the Kimpo E branch, F branch, and G branch, and opened a regular deposit account with the same content.
(2) Around August 1, 2011, D withdrawn KRW 50 million from among the deposits of KRW 500 million, and around May 3, 2012, D deposited KRW 450 million at the Kimpo-gun H branch where the Plaintiff worked as the branch head of a branch for one year, and the regular deposit account was opened under C’s name.
B. Around May 6, 2013, (1) D deposited the above KRW 450 million at the Kimpo-gun F branch at the time the Defendant was working as a branch office for one year, and the fixed deposit account was opened under C’s name.
(2) On May 13, 2013, 201, C applied for a loan to the branch of the Kimpo-gun Bank F. On the same day, C extended KRW 45 million to C as security of the instant deposit claim without D’s consent.
(3) On October 17, 2013, C filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Incheon District Court. On November 8, 2013, Kimpo-gun offset the claim for the refund of loans of KRW 445 million against C and the claim for the deposit of this case against November 8, 2013.
C. (1) Since D’s complaint and written agreement are owned by the Plaintiff on December 10, 2013, including D’s complaint and written agreement, D’s claim for the deposit of this case, the Defendant and C, despite the existence of an occupational duty to preserve the claim, shall incur damages of KRW 450 million to D by conducting the loan with the claim for the deposit of this case as security without D’s consent.