1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company established on July 15, 2014 for the purpose of operating a postnatal care center.

D and the Defendant, from the time of the Plaintiff’s establishment, operated a postnatal care center located in Sung-nam-si, Sungnam-si, C (hereinafter “H postnatal care center”). The Plaintiff’s representative or representative director was the Defendant from July 15, 2014 to February 17, 2016, and was D from February 17, 2016 to March.

B. E and F invested in the Plaintiff in around 2016, and thereafter D, Defendant, E, and F operated H postnatal care centers through the Plaintiff.

At the time, the defendant was mainly in charge of the plaintiff's financial and accounting affairs.

C. On July 6, 2017, D, Defendant, E, and F entered into a partnership contract with the content that D independently operates the Plaintiff, Defendant, E, and F waives the right to claim distribution of profits, and both losses and liabilities incurred in the existing business are to be borne by D.

On August 29, 2017, the Plaintiff attached Form ① from December 28, 2015 to July 6, 2017 to the Defendant.

1. As indicated in the Plaintiff’s corporate bank account (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s bank account”) revealed the reasons why KRW 506,227,746 was transferred from the Defendant’s national bank account (hereinafter “Defendant’s bank account”) to the Defendant’s national bank account, and ② a written explanation demanding the return of KRW 4,973,415, which was arbitrarily used without returning the Plaintiff’s corporate card even if the said business contract was terminated.

E. From December 28, 2015 to July 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) voluntarily transferred KRW 506,227,746 from the Plaintiff’s account to the Defendant’s account; and (b) embezzled the card amount of KRW 4,973,430 by using the Plaintiff’s corporate card at his/her own discretion from July 8, 2017 to July 27, 2017; (c) however, the Prosecutor of the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office issued a disposition of uncompetence of evidence on December 28, 2018.

Therefore, the plaintiff appealed and issued a second investigation order on March 27, 2019, but the prosecutor of the Incheon District Prosecutors' Office.