1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing steel structure.

C is a person who engages in trade business, etc. with the trade name “D,” and the Defendant was a C’s employee from March 3, 2014 to May 1, 2015.

The plaintiff, on March 24, 2014, to C, and C, on the same year

8. up to 31. up to 31. A letter of order for purchase was issued to the non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate non-corporate group to supply the burners made of 03X12H10MPY to KRW 1,727,272,727 (excluding value-added tax).

The Plaintiff’s order, etc. to C on March 24, 2014 KRW 654 million, according to the order, etc.,

5.15.5 million won;

7.1.4 billion won;

7.4.150 million won;

7. 8.5 million won was remitted, and the sum of KRW 1,508,99,999 was paid by way of delivering a bill of exchange causing KRW 200 million (hereinafter “prepaid amount”).

C returned 200 million won out of the instant prepaid payment to the Plaintiff on August 23, 2014.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C on the claim for refund of advance payment under this Court 2014Gahap70132.

On September 24, 2015, the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,308,99,999 (i.e., KRW 1,508,99,99 - KRW 200 million) and damages for delay.”

The Plaintiff filed a complaint against C as a crime of fraud and occupational embezzlement, and it was found that C deposited KRW 50 million out of the instant prepaid payment in the Defendant’s account on August 23, 2014 during the investigation process.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 to 3, Eul's evidence 1 and 6 (including numbers), and the summary of the argument of the parties concerned as to the whole purport of the argument: plaintiff 1's assertion: The defendant's participation in the acquisition by deception or embezzlement of the prepaid money of this case by the defendant. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages of 50 million won.

2. Claim 2: A claim for return of a loan based on a creditor's subrogation right (the first preliminary claim) has a claim for a loan of KRW 50 million to the defendant.

The defendant is insolvent.