1. The Plaintiff, Defendant A, and Defendant B, as to KRW 5,990,00 for each of the said money, and each of the said money, from April 22, 2014 to December 2, 2014.

1. Claims against the defendant A and B

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

b. Claims against Defendant C, D, E, F, G, H, and I

(a) Grounds for claims: as shown in the annexed sheet of grounds for claims;

B. Determination 1) Article 760(3) of the Civil Act provides that an aided person or an assistant shall be deemed a collaborative act, thereby imposing liability on an aided person as a joint tortfeasor. Aiding and abetting refers to all direct or indirect acts facilitating a tort. It includes not only cases by commission but also cases where a person obligated to act makes it easier for the commission of a tortfeasor due to omission that does not take various measures to prevent it. Unlike the Criminal Act, interpretation of the Civil Act, which indicates negligence as a matter of principle for the purpose of compensating for damages, can also aid and abetting tort by negligence. In such a case, the content of negligence refers to a violation of this duty on the premise that there is a duty of care not to assist a tort. 2) However, in order to impose joint tort liability as a tort against another person, proximate causal relation exists between aiding and abetting act and the damage suffered by the victim by a tort. In determining whether proximate causal relation exists, the possibility and predictability of the tort in question by negligence, as well as the impact of the damage caused by negligence, the degree of contribution to the victim’s trust, and the expansion of responsibility.

Supreme Court Decision 2013Da91597 Decided March 27, 2014 and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da2836 Decided January 29, 2015