All
| TITLE | [Damages(Gi)]Supreme Court Decision 2006Da79674 Delivered on July 10, 2008 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| [1] In case where a third party suffered losses causing from making false statements on the audit reports, the meaning of ""the date when the claimant has become aware of pertinent facts"" under Article 17 (7) of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies which is the starting point of reckoning of auditor's liability for damages to a third party in accordance with Article 17 (2) of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies [2] Whether a financial institution which evaluates corporate credit risks by using financial statements and audit reports and provides credit in accordance with the results falls within the scope of ""a third party"" as stipulated in Article 17 (2) of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies (affirmative) [3] The case holding that a credit guarantee institution falls within the scope of ""a third party"" as stipulated in Article 17 (2) of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies, where it trusts audit reports by a external auditor relating to the corporations applying for incorporation into the securitization assets, selects qualified corporations on the basis of them, and accordingly guarantees payment for the debt reimbursement borne by Special Purpose Company to the financial institution [4] The case holding that the casual relation between false statements on audit reports made by a external auditor, the selection of qualified corporations by a credit guarantee institution relying upon them, and occurrence of liability for guarantee therefrom cannot be denied, solely on the ground that factors such as the validity of resources for redemption and business plans, corporate profitability, etc., other than corporate financial condition showed in the financial statements, would be taken into consideration in the process where a credit guarantee institution selected qualified corporations to be incorporated into the securitization assets | |
