beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.06.09 2015가단2026

부당이득금반환

Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A and B possess P Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S.O; Plaintiff C owns R Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu Q; Plaintiff D uses T Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S.; Plaintiff C uses V Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, U.S.; Plaintiff F uses X Kindergartens located in U.S., Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S.; Plaintiff G uses X Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, U.S.; Plaintiff H uses AB Kindergartens located in U.S.; Plaintiff C uses AB Kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S.; Plaintiff J uses AD kindergartens located in U.S. AE; Plaintiff J uses AF kindergartens located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S., U.S.; Plaintiff L uses AJ kindergartens located in U.S. in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu.

B. Defendant M was the chief of the AK office of a certified judicial scrivener in around 2012, and currently is the chief of the AL office of a certified judicial scrivener.

Defendant N is the wife of Defendant M.

C. From October 29, 2012 to November 22, 2012, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract with Defendant M to subcontract the registration of co-owned land partition with respect to a kindergarten located in an apartment, and Defendant N guaranteed that:

D. From August 2012 to September 2012, the Plaintiffs paid to Defendant M totaling KRW 16,643,000 as the expenses for issuing all the registered certificates. From November 2012 to March 2013, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 32,521,90 in sum as the fee.

The respective costs paid by the plaintiffs are the same as the amount stated in the claims.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 18, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. (1) The Plaintiffs’ assertion (i.e., Defendant M received commission from the Plaintiffs, but did not carry out any business until the completion of the business on November 30, 2014. As such, Defendant M obtained unjust enrichment, Defendant M should return the said money.

The full certificate of registered matters may be issued by the competent authority, and the plaintiffs do not need to obtain the full certificate of registered matters according to the number of apartment households.