beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. On May 18, 2000, the plaintiffs asserted that they operated the secondhand shop with the trade name of "E" on the ground of two parcels outside D, Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu.
The Defendants prepared false documents as if they did not actually agreed on the transfer fees in the manner of manipulating or vicariously executing the land and property owned by the Plaintiffs in relation to the F Development Project “(F)” without properly investigating the property owned by the Plaintiffs and omitting the notification procedure. ② In doing so, the Defendants prepared false documents as if they did not actually agreed on the transfer fees, and ③ in this process committed illegal acts such as collective assault against the Plaintiffs.
Therefore, the Defendants should pay as tort damages damages the sum of KRW 300 million in property taken by the Plaintiffs, KRW 200 million in damage compensation due to collective assault, KRW 500 million in total, KRW 300 million in damage compensation due to the suspension of the Plaintiffs’ business, KRW 300 million in total due to the Plaintiffs’ business suspension, KRW 1.6 billion in total.
2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court below and evidence Nos. 1 to 25 alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants committed each tort of the above paragraphs (1) through (3) above, as alleged by the plaintiffs, in the process of accepting and vicariously executing property such as scrap iron, etc. of the plaintiffs in the Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Jung-gu, Incheon, which is located outside the above development project zone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Rather, in full view of the evidence Nos. 2 through 5, evidence Nos. 7-1, 2, 16, 17, evidence Nos. 18-2, 20 through 23 (including paper numbers) and evidence Nos. 18-2, 20 through 23, the whole purport of the pleadings No. 1, the plaintiffs entered into a contract for a compensation agreement with Defendant C on Oct. 4, 2007 with respect to the goods owned by the plaintiffs in the above business district, and some of them were omitted.