beta
Text
1. Defendant D’s KRW 18,00,00 for Plaintiff A, and KRW 9,00,00 for Plaintiff B and each of the said money from March 19, 2016.
Reasons
【Claims against Defendant D】
1. The Defendant D, as an owner from July 2013, operated a total of 21 units of accounts and 500,000 won of monthly payments per unit (hereinafter “instant accounts”).
The instant guidance was dispatched on January 2015, and Plaintiff A paid KRW 18 million for 18 months from July 2013 to July 2013, and Plaintiff B paid KRW 9 million for 18 months from July 2013 to July 2013, but the Plaintiffs failed to receive the guidance money.
Since the instant fraternity constitutes a loan for consumption was sold, Defendant D, as a borrower of a loan for consumption, is obligated to refund the monthly payment made by the Plaintiffs during that period.
2. Judgment based on the recommendation of confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act).
1. The plaintiffs asserted that they were not Defendant D, but subscribed to the instant system by introducing Defendant D and Dong-related parties to Defendant C, with the introduction of Defendant C. The monthly payment was also remitted to Defendant C’s account.
Since Defendant C actually served as a leader, it is jointly and severally liable with Defendant D to refund the monthly payment that the Plaintiffs paid during that period.
2. In full view of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as a whole, Defendant C also joined the instant fraternity, the fact that Defendant C received monthly payments from the Plaintiffs to his own account and paid them to Defendant D by adding up his monthly payments, etc. Defendant C also received from other members of the fraternity and paid them to other members of the fraternity. Defendant C also did not receive the Defendant C’s fraternity payments. Plaintiff A, upon introduction by Defendant C around the end of 2011, prior to his entry into the instant fraternity, did not receive the Defendant C’s fraternity payments. Plaintiff A, upon the introduction by Defendant C around the end of 2011, paid KRW 20,000 and paid KRW 22,00,000 monthly payments.
Considering the above facts, the facts cited by the Plaintiffs are as follows.