beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.12.06 2017나3862

신용카드이용대금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff asserts that the judgment on the cause of the claim is as follows.

The Plaintiff, who received a credit card from the Defendant, has paid mobile phone charges to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) that the Plaintiff joined by using the said credit card, by automatic transfer.

The Defendant, on May 27, 2016, withdrawn 95,650 won of the mobile phone fee for the fourth month that the Plaintiff had to pay to C in duplicate, and thus, the Defendant shall return the said money to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant has withdrawn the mobile phone fee in duplicate only with the descriptions of Gap evidence 1 and Gap evidence 10, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, it is only recognized that the Plaintiff’s mobile phone charges of April 2016, 2016, KRW 594,155, which was withdrawn from the Plaintiff’s DNA bank account on May 27, 2016, KRW 95,650, which was the mobile phone charges of May 2016 against C, and KRW 97,470, which were the mobile phone charges of May 2016 against C.

The plaintiff's claim is rejected.

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.