CASE: Nam Suk Suh v. Dung Won Investment & Consulting Corp., et at.,

COURT: Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Central

JUDGE: Eliha M. Berle

DATE: 4/19/2002

A Korean security firm ( Dung Won Securities Co., Ltd. ) agreed with a Southern California investment firm ( Mirae Investment ) to work together. California investment firm produces customers and Korean security firm offers Korea trading services. California investment firm produced 140 new customers to Korea security firm.

Korean security firm also allow the California investment firm to access customer's confidential information. California investment firm uses confidential information to make illegal trades. One customer ( Nam Suk Suk ) lost $18,463 and he sued Korean security firm. Claims includes trading without license and fail to protect confidential information, etc.

Judge found for customer and awarded the customer $58,463.

Questions:

• Why the customer sue Korean security firm and not the California investment firm?
  
• Was the California investment firm agent of the Korean security firm?
  
• Should Korean security firm have the duty to check if the California investment firm is legally ( having the necessary license ) allowed to do business as it asserted before signing the cooperative agreement?
  
• The judge awarded the customer $58,463. It is much more than the actual loss. Why more than the actual lost was awarded? what are these awards? What is the basis for the additional award?