부당이득금반환
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 22,00,000 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 6% per annum from January 13, 2014 to December 18, 2014; and (b) December 19, 2014.
The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 and 2 of the evidence.
On April 2, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an advertising agency contract with Taewonsan Co., Ltd. on an advertising agency contract with the content that the Plaintiff carries out the advertising agency, etc. related to the sales advertisement of the non-dong apartment in the Yanan-gu Urban Complex.
On April 15, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to request the Defendant to produce videos for promoting the sale of the above apartment (definite) (hereinafter “instant contract”).
On April 19, 2013, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant advance payment of KRW 22 million (including value-added tax) as stipulated in the instant contract.
Since then, the promotion of the project for the construction of the above apartment did not proceed.
According to the above facts, the contract of this case was a situation in which the parties to the contract of this case and the defendant cannot perform their obligations under the contract of this case without any reason attributable to them.
As can be seen, if the performance of an obligation becomes impossible in a bilateral contract without any cause attributable to both parties, the obligor is exempted from the obligation to perform the obligation and may not claim any consideration. Thus, in the event that both parties did not perform the obligation, the contractual relationship terminates and the performance already performed is not legally attributable and can be claimed to return the performance in accordance with the legal doctrine of unjust enrichment.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da98655 Decided May 28, 2009). Meanwhile, when the acquisition of unjust enrichment is a pecuniary gain, such gain shall be presumed to exist regardless of whether the purchaser has consumed it, and the bona fide beneficiary shall be liable to return the profit to the extent that the gain remains. The bona fide beneficiary shall return the profit with interest attached thereto, and the bona fide beneficiary shall be deemed to be the beneficiary of bad faith from the time when the lawsuit was brought against the bona fide beneficiary.
In this case, the defendant's gain is a monetary gain, and it is presumed to exist.