계약금반환
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 3,000,000 and the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff on October 2018.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion made in good faith payment of KRW 10 million under the name of the down payment for the supply of fish in order to assist C, but since the transaction was suspended between C and the Defendant, the said KRW 10 million shall be returned.
B. The plaintiff alleged in the defendant's assertion was a person in charge of fund management while engaging in the business with C, and the defendant requested to provide collateral upon request from C, and the plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million to the defendant's account.
However, since the defendant's attempted amount of money received from C is up to seven million won, the defendant is only liable to return to the plaintiff three million won after deducting seven million won from the above KRW 10 million.
C. According to the evidence No. 1, the fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant on August 11, 2017 is recognized.
On the other hand, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the entire arguments, it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff would be given priority to the defendant through C, and the remaining money after deducting the loan money will be returned after settlement, and that the defendant paid KRW 10 million as advance payment or deposit money to the defendant.
(1) An advance payment is the amount that a wholesaler pays to a shipowner, a right holder of a fishing vessel, etc. before shipping, in order to secure a stable supply in advance.
The first owner, etc. uses advance payment as a fund for withdrawal, and it is common to settle the accounts and return if the transaction is terminated after the supply of the first purchaser corresponding to the amount of advance payment to the wholesaler.
② The Plaintiff asserts that, up to the trial, no one exists between the Defendant and the former and the latter.
However, according to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 2 (Recording) and Eul evidence Nos. 2 (Notice of Reasons for Non-prosecution), the plaintiff sells fishery products on consignment by the police.