logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.06.26 2014나45470
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The part of the conjunctive claim in the first instance judgment against the defendant which exceeds the money ordered to be paid below.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around August 2009, the Plaintiff and C received a proposal from the Defendant that “The Plaintiff and C want to invest and operate D Co., Ltd. operating the Internet shopping mall together with the total sales business of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) and distribute the profits according to the investment ratio.” The proposal that “The Plaintiff and C may invest KRW 50 million out of the down payment KRW 100,000,000,000,000 from among the down payment KRW 50,000.”

Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 40 million to the Defendant on August 21, 2009, and KRW 10 million around that time by C, respectively, as an investment deposit.

B. On August 28, 2009, the Defendant entered into a sales contract under which the Defendant would receive commission fees from E when the Defendant recruited agents or sold channels (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

C. After that, the Plaintiff received a request for additional investment from the Defendant on September 23, 2009 and paid KRW 100 million to the Defendant.

As above, the Defendant paid the sum of KRW 150 million received from the Plaintiff and C as the price under the sales contract of this case to E.

On September 209 or October 2009, the defendant distributed approximately KRW 18.6 million to the plaintiff, KRW 1.4 million to the defendant, approximately KRW 5 million to the defendant, and KRW 5 million to the F, and used the remainder as office operating expenses and other expenses.

E. On March 1, 2011, the Defendant terminated the instant sales contract with E, and on April 1, 2011, issued a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with the purport that the Defendant is liable for a debt of KRW 60 million from G, the actual representative of E, to the effect that it is liable for a debt of KRW 60 million.

F. Meanwhile, the Defendant received a total of KRW 25 million from E to December 30, 2011 from E to a new bank account in the name of the Defendant.

G. On May 31, 2014, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed the said KRW 25,50,000 received from E in Seoul Western District Court Decision 2012Ma2266.

arrow