logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
서울남부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015가단233566
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a certified customs broker who is the representative of the D Customs Office.

From March 11, 2002 to January 13, 2014, Defendant B served as the secretary of the Plaintiff’s office, and Defendant C as the employee of the Plaintiff’s office from July 3, 2006 to December 31, 2013, and was in charge of the duty return and duty refund of the said office.

B. On January 2, 2008, Defendant B was issued a summary order of KRW 3,00,000 (Seoul Southern District Court Decision 201Da9718, Sept. 26, 2015) on August 6, 2015, on the fact that Defendant B voluntarily consumed KRW 7,570,000 in total by the same method 28 times until January 10, 2014, while he received KRW 10,00,000 from an E company traded with the Plaintiff’s office and kept it for the Plaintiff’s personal purpose. This summary order became final and conclusive on September 26, 2015.

C. On February 22, 2016, Defendant B deposited KRW 7,705,695 with the Plaintiff as the principal deposit, and with respect to the embezzlement amounting to KRW 7,570,00,00 as the Seoul Northern District Court gold Order 943 in 2016, Defendant B deposited KRW 7,705,695 per annum from October 15, 2015, following the service date of the copy of the complaint of this case to the deposit date.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5, 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, and 7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Defendant B embezzled KRW 15,137,00, out of the commission that the Plaintiff’s office received from December 2, 2007 to December 2013 as payment for the export and the refund of customs duties on behalf of seven business partners, including Lpiriros Co., Ltd.). (2) The Defendants were working as an employee of the Plaintiff’s office on or around December 30, 2013, and thus, the Defendants were obligated to perform duties for the benefit of the Plaintiff’s office, but established an employment certified customs broker office and established the Frans Co., Ltd.’s office, five business partners, including the Plaintiff.