logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.13 2016가합100455
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The facts below the basic facts are either in dispute between the parties or in each entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 2, 12, 13, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, 2, 3, 4-1, 3, and 5-1, 3, 4-1, 3, and 5-2, respectively.

Defendant Future Treatment Co., Ltd. (formerly treated Securities Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “Defendant Future Treatment”) and Uagate Investment Advisory Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Loh Deposit”) are corporations that engage in financial investment business prescribed in Article 6(1) of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”); and Plaintiff A is the representative director of Plaintiff B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff B”) and the shareholders holding 100% of Plaintiff B’s shares.

B. Defendant U2C has operated financial investment instruments (hereinafter “instant products”) with the content that, by selling and purchasing each other’s call options (referring to the right to purchase the underlying assets at a specific price at a specific time) listed in the Korea Exchange as the contract amount received as an investment consignment from investors, gains profits from the purchase of each other’s different event price options (referring to the right to purchase the underlying assets at a specific time) and that, if the cumulative yield exceeds 18% per annum, 20% of the total profits, and if the cumulative yield exceeds 18% per annum, 30% of the total profits are acquired as performance fees (hereinafter “instant products”).

C. On April 2015, C, an employee of Defendant Future Treatment, sent a text message that introduces the instant product to Plaintiff A, and received the text message from Plaintiff A through contact with the Plaintiff and received it several times, and explained the instant product at Defendant Future Treatment D Branch Office and the Plaintiff’s office using the product proposal (Evidence A; hereinafter “instant product proposal”).

arrow