beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 120 million and its KRW 60 million, Defendant B Co., Ltd. from November 15, 2016 to June 20.
Reasons
1. Part of the claim against the defendant B
A. On May 15, 2016, Defendant B, while attracting business funds equivalent to KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff, entered into a two-lane investment agreement with the Plaintiff to pay dividends equivalent to 20% of the principal at the same time as the repayment of principal after six months, and Defendant B, at that time, entered into an investment agreement on May 19, 2016 under the same condition and received an investment payment of KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff each time. Accordingly, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 120 million [50 million + (50 million + (50 million + KRW 20%) and damages for delay after each due date.
(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. The part of the claim against the defendant C
A. On May 15, 2016, the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) was as follows: (a) Defendant B kept the business funds equivalent to KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff; (b) concluded an investment agreement in which the Plaintiff would pay dividends equivalent to 20% of the principal at the same time as the repayment of principal after six months thereafter; and (c) Defendant C also agreed to ensure the return of the principal amount to the Plaintiff during the process of receiving an investment amount of KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff.
Therefore, Defendant C should pay the sum of KRW 100 million (=50 million x 2) of the investment principal paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff in accordance with the agreement to guarantee the return of principal to the Plaintiff, jointly and severally with Defendant B.
(2) If the agreement to guarantee the return of principal against the plaintiff is not recognized, each of the above investment agreements is obtained from the legal office operated by the defendant C with the permission of the defendant C, and the non-party D, who was working in the office of "Secretariat" with the permission of the defendant C, deceiving the plaintiff, thereby deceiving the plaintiff.
And Defendant C.