logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.09 2019나68154
구상금
Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant shall be dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 7, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract for the right of lease for housing (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and E with respect to the right of lease for lease for the purpose of compensating for damages in the event of a loss caused by forgery, fraud, coercion, capacity to act, or invalidation or cancellation by an unauthorized representation in the course of lending a loan for a lease for a deposit for a deposit for lease for a house (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. B, by deceiving the Defendant, obtained the Defendant’s seal impression, certificate of personal seal impression, driver’s license, resident registration, and H passbook, etc. by deceiving the Defendant.

B Using this, the Defendant made a false lease agreement on December 13, 2013, stating that the F building G from C is leased to KRW 260,000,000,000. On January 9, 2014, the Defendant applied for a loan under the said lease agreement under the name of the Defendant, and attached the said lease agreement and the documents received from the Defendant.

E entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant on a deposit basis (hereinafter “the loan agreement of this case”), and paid the lessor KRW 168,00,000 to the lessor.

C. Since the fact that the lease agreement under the name of the Defendant was false, E was impossible to recover the loan under the instant loan agreement. Accordingly, on July 11, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 201,600,000, insurance money under the instant insurance contract to E.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 6 through 13, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant aided and abetted B's lending fraud to E, and thus, the defendant is jointly and severally liable for tort with B and C.

The defendant is obligated to recover the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to E and the delay damages to the plaintiff who subrogated the right to claim damages of E on the basis of subrogation by the insurer.

3. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant is legitimate.

arrow