logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.19 2016가단205971
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 Defendant is a juristic person established for the purpose of investment trading business, investment brokerage business, investment advisory business, etc., the Plaintiff, one of which was a person who opened an entrusted account for stock transaction (number C: C; hereinafter “instant account”) at the branch of a financial investment company B, and D at the time of the Plaintiff’s preliminary fraud is a person who opened an entrusted account for stock transaction (number G: hereinafter “D account”) at the F branch located in Songpa-gu, Songpa-gu.

B. On August 21, 2015, as the share price of the securities market in the gold day falls, there were KRW 202,536 shares issued by H, and KRW 72,917,054 shares issued by the Plaintiff, which were held in the instant account, fall short of the market price of the shares issued by H, and KRW 72,917,054 were incurred after the completion of the Chapter.

C. As the total amount of collateral value is likely to fall short of the collateral ratio, the Plaintiff and D shall prevent the opposite trade by raising the collateral ratio by substituting the entire stocks of the D account into the instant account (hereinafter “instant substitute”). Around August 21, 2015, the Plaintiff and D requested the Defendant to visit the branch of the Defendant Company F and transfer the entire stocks of the D account to the instant account by transferring the entire stocks of the Defendant to the instant account.

D Account was an account opened in Korea, not the Defendant Company, and thus, in order to carry out the instant transfer account, the issuance of a securities card was prior to the issuance of the instant transfer account. However, on August 21, 2015, there was any interest in which D had paid sales orders, and it was impossible to issue a securities card on the day according to the guidelines for the operation of the Defendant Electronic Computer System.

E. At around 08:30 on August 24, 2015, D visited the F branch of the Defendant Company F branch, requesting the issuance of a securities card and the instant substitution, and as a result, D did not issue a securities card due to the Defendant’s computer problem, and the instant substitution was not made on the same day.

arrow