logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.11 2018가단10249
부당이득금 등
Text

1. All claims filed against the Defendants by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed E are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On May 6, 2015, Defendant B and D made a pre-contract on non-performing loans to the Plaintiff and the Selection, and the Credit Business Company F (hereinafter “F”), and suggested that Defendant D make an investment of KRW 2 billion in the acquisition fund of non-performing loans in the amount of KRW 15.5 billion. Defendant B made an investment of KRW 1.86 billion in the amount of KRW 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.8 billion in the amount of 1.8 billion in the amount of 1.8 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.4 billion in the amount of 1.6 billion in the amount of her pre-contract contract.

As above, the Defendants, even though they did not have an intention or ability to prepare the above KRW 1.86 billion, deceiving the Plaintiff and the selector and caused them to be confiscated. As such, the Defendants are obliged to compensate for damages of KRW 180 million in total, including the above KRW 140 million and consolation money of KRW 40 million suffered by the Plaintiff and the selector. Accordingly, the Defendants are obliged to pay KRW 126 million to the Plaintiff according to their investment ratio.

B. Each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10 alone is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion that the defendants conspired in collusion with the plaintiff and the selector and caused the plaintiff to be confiscated with payment of KRW 140 million, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, the plaintiff's claim and the selector's claim seeking compensation for damages arising from the above deception is without merit.

2. Conclusion, the claim against the Defendants by the Plaintiff and the designated parties is dismissed in entirety as there is no reasonable ground.

arrow