beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts below the underlying facts may be acknowledged either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings as set out in Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and Eul evidence 1-1 and 2.
The defendant is the largest shareholder of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) who is engaged in pharmaceutical development business, etc. and the person who served as the representative director of C from March 29, 2012 to May 22, 2013.
B. In early 2010, the Plaintiff received a request from the Defendant to inquire about the means of attracting investment in C. However, in order to undergo difficulties in attracting investment from an institutional investor due to the total market value of C’s total market value, the Plaintiff offered to the Defendant that “First, the Defendant purchased shares of C, which are distributed in the market by inviting an individual owner, raise the share price, and attracts an institutional investor after raising the total market value,” and the Defendant agreed to comply with the Plaintiff’s above proposal.
Therefore, the Plaintiff introduced D through a patrolman on December 2, 2010, and thereafter, from D, “40% of profits from market price profits that may arise after the Defendant putting stocks into the fund of all individuals and setting off C,” 40% of the profits from market price, and the remainder 20% of D themselves, etc., were offered and delivered to the Defendant. The Defendant accepted the proposal as above and requested C’s market price manipulation (hereinafter “instant market price manipulation”) via the Plaintiff.
C. Therefore, D requested E and F to manipulate C’s price, and F instructed G to manipulate C’s stock price by setting the time of sale and purchase, trading volume, trading unit price, etc., and G to instruct H to manipulate C’s stock price in the same manner. G and H participated in the instant market price manipulation from February 8, 201 to February 28, 2011.
However, as H and G suffered loss due to the price drop in the market manipulation process of this case, they are through the Plaintiff.