All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2010Da41386 Decided September 30, 2010 [Damages] [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| [1] The case affirming the judgment below holding that in case where an employee Eul of company Gap, which is an international shipping enterprise's domestic shipping agent, issued D/O for import goods, and the importer presented the D/O to a warehouseman and received the certificate of deposit of goods, and delivered it to savings bank Byung, and formed a transfer security contract for import goods by means of agreement on possession, and took out the loan, and the other bank which possessed B/L filed a lawsuit to seek delivery of import goods, and savings bank Byung's argument that it acquired the security in good-faith was rejected, and savings bank Byung lost the security for marine goods, Eul is liable as a joint tortfeasor, and company Gap is liable as Eul's employer for loss incurred by savings bank Byung due to the above loan [2] Ordinary loss which a security holder suffered due to trust on a movable asset transfer security which could have been effective at the outset and after the movable asset subject to the transfer security had been delivered to the other (=the loan to debtor within the scope of the value of a transfer security object), and criterion point of time for the assessment of value of the above transfer security object | |
