부당이득금반환 등
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant C, Defendant D, KRW 11.60,00 for KRW 1960,000, KRW 2480,00 for KRW 1.166,00 for KRW 11.64,00 for each of them.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. At around November 2013, Defendant E lent a white village credit cooperative in its name without compensation upon the request of the head of the private village, and Defendant I then lent a white village credit cooperative account in its name with the intention to receive the payment from the person who was not the party with the name at that time, and Defendant I lent a white village passbook in its name.
B. On December 2013, Defendant G received a proposal from a loan broker broker, who was faced with economic difficulties, and sent the passbook to K, “When it is sent as an identification card, it would make the details of the deposit and withdrawal transaction, which would enhance the credit rating and receive the loan,” and sent the passbook to Kwikset service.
Defendant
On December 11, 2013, KRW 100,000 Korean bank C 4.2 million on December 11, 2013, December 201, 2013, South Korea bank: KRW 6.2 million on December 11, 2013, South Korea bank, KRW 2.9 million on December 11, 2011, 200, KRW 2910,000 on December 11, 2011, 200, KRW 2.5 million on December 11, 2013, 200 G 2.5 million on December 11, 2013, KRW 2.5 million on December 11, 2013, KRW 300,000 on the 3.3 million on December 13, 2013. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 24873, Dec. 13, 2013>
C. On December 10, 2013, the Plaintiff received false Messenger’s Messenger’s Messenger’s name in mobile Messenger’s mobile Messenger’s name and transferred the money to the Defendant’s account in the name as follows.
[Ground of recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, response to each order to submit financial transaction information, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The part on the claim for return of unjust enrichment against Defendant G and I
A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff asserted that he remitted money to the account held in the name of the said Defendants without any legal ground, and as a result, the said Defendants obtained profit equivalent to the remittance amount and suffered damage equivalent to the said amount to the Plaintiff, so the said Defendants shall return the said remittance amount to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.