beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Plaintiff A and B are married, Plaintiff C and D are children, and Defendant C and D are financial institutions in charge of receipt and disbursement, and Defendant D are financial institutions in charge of receipt and disbursement.
The deposit account number of Plaintiffs A E 50 million won due to the due date of the opening of the account number of Plaintiffs A E 5,00 million won on January 10, 2012, KRW 20 million on July 16, 2012, KRW 16,000,000 on July 16, 2012, Plaintiff B 5,000 won on July 3, 2013, 2013, January 10, 2013, KRW 14 million on January 10, 2013, KRW 10,000 won on January 10, 2013, Plaintiff CI2,00 million on January 10, 2013, KRW 100,000 on September 10, 2013, 200, KRW 1300,000,000 J. 13, 2013
The Plaintiffs deposited the instant deposit in the Defendant Union’s regular deposit (hereinafter referred to as “the instant deposit”) pursuant to the sequences set forth below, where D works for the Defendant Union as indicated below.
The loan account number of Plaintiff A K 45 million won on April 10, 2012, the first deposit amount of KRW 2 L18 million on January 10, 2013, the expiration date of the loan account number of Plaintiff A 1: (a) KRW 3 Plaintiff B M 45 million on July 16, 2013; and (b) KRW 34 N1,2.6 million on February 14, 2013, the deposit amount of KRW 18 million on July 16, 2012, KRW 3 Plaintiff B M 45 million on July 16, 2013; (c) KRW 341,2.6 million on January 14, 2013, KRW 450,000 on February 14, 2013, Plaintiff CO2,000 on January 45, 2013, KRW 301.5 million on July 16, 2013
C. After that, D obtained a loan under the name of the Plaintiffs from the Defendant Cooperative (hereinafter “instant loan”) with the said Plaintiffs’ deposit as indicated in the following table, and as a result, D withdrawn the loan “1 or 6,” and used “the instant loan” for personal purposes, such as purchase of sports lottery tickets.
D was arrested on November 7, 2012 due to the suspicion of embezzlement of public funds of the Defendant Union. The employees of the Defendant Union found the Plaintiffs to verify whether the instant loans were normally implemented according to the Plaintiffs’ intent. On the same day, the Plaintiffs were to the said employees “new maturity, early termination, and early termination in each association’s deposits.”