beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) against Plaintiff A, KRW 205,00,000; and (b) against Plaintiff B, KRW 142,80,000; and (c) with respect to each of the above amounts, on December 9, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant, related to the parties, is a person who operated the kz F Fpon store in the Gu E building 319 during the period from May 201 to December 2013, 201, and the Plaintiff A was a former employee’s partner, and the Plaintiff B was aware of the Defendant’s introduction to Plaintiff A.
B. On July 9, 2013, the Defendant proposed to make an investment to the Plaintiff 1, 2013 (hereinafter “Defendant 1”), stating that “I will refund KRW 110,000,000 per day (1.1 billion) every 100,000 won to the Defendant,” and that “I will refund KRW 110,000,000 per day over 100,000 won.” (2) Accordingly, the Plaintiff A remitted to the Defendant a total of KRW 315,00,000 from July 9, 2013 to September 25, 2013 as an investment deposit, and received a return of KRW 110,000,000 from the Defendant.
C. On September 4, 2013, the Defendant proposed, through Plaintiff A, that “A shall pay the principal and interest of KRW 1100,000 each day for 100 million to Plaintiff B, and shall pay the principal and interest of KRW 100,000 each day after 100 days.” (ii) The Plaintiff B remitted the total amount of KRW 200,000 from September 4, 2013 to October 7, 2013, to the Defendant for investment, and received a return of KRW 57,20,00 from the Defendant.
1. After the progress of a criminal case against the Defendant, the Defendant: (a) as at the time of receiving the money from the Plaintiffs, the sales of the KIKO Pcaf operated by the Defendant sharply deteriorated, making it difficult to pay investment profits to its partners G; and (b) was liable for a debt exceeding KRW 2 billion by combining financial institutions and credit card use fees, personal debts, etc.; and (c) thus, even if receiving the investment money from the Plaintiffs, even though there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and profits from the investment money, it is recommended that the Defendant would pay the investment profits to the Plaintiffs; and (d) as such, it is from