beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A’s KRW 46,502,332 as well as 5% per annum from October 24, 2013 to July 16, 2015.
Reasons
1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in addition to the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 9 through 13, Eul evidence No. 11 and 12 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply).
Defendant A entered the Plaintiff around July 16, 201 and worked as a business employee in charge of the sale and collection of the Plaintiff’s products at the Plaintiff’s D’s D’s D’s D’s D’s D’s D’s D’ from March 201, and the selectr C’s wife as Defendant A’s wife on June 23, 201 and June 22, 2012; Defendant B’s each type of sale of Defendant A’s products; and each type of guarantee period is two years between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on June 22, 2012; and Defendant A incurred damage to the Plaintiff due to his/her responsibility during the course of performing his/her duties (including the existing liability and other liabilities arising from the transaction relations).
B. The Plaintiff prohibited abnormal transactions, such as dumping, selling at discount in excess of the designated discount rate, and selling virtual sales (the pretending that there was no actual transaction, and reporting it by sales) by setting the bond management rules and the disciplinary action against the persons involved in the claims accident, and determined that the business operators violating this prohibition compensates for damages arising therefrom.
C. On July 2001, Defendant A signed and sealed on the “statement of compliance with the Company’s regulations and mutual aid use” at the time of the Plaintiff’s entry, which includes the content that Defendant A would not engage in an irregular business act for the achievement of sales goals.
The Plaintiff was conducting an audit of the business performance for Defendant A on November 5, 2012, and the difference between the outstanding amount and the actual outstanding amount is KRW 202,463,829, while conducting an audit of the business performance for Defendant A, and the difference between the outstanding amount and the actual outstanding amount is 30.