부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the supplementary selective claims in the trial are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows 2. The plaintiff’s assertion added in relation to the claim for return of unjust enrichment at the trial of the court of first instance is determined as follows 3. This part of the judgment is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination as to the claim for selective addition as set forth below 4. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of
2. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance written “50,000,000 won” in the 3th sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written with “50,000,000 won” (hereinafter “the agreement of this case”).
From 5th to 16th 5th 14th 16th 16 of the judgment of the first instance court, the part stating these facts and the evidence A No. 18 alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant unlawfully informed the Plaintiff of harm and injury at the time of donation and assignment of the instant case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. The part of the “this fact and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone are insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff for the purpose of acquiring unjust profits at the time of donation and assignment of the instant case, or that there was a special unfair act or means against the Plaintiff in the course of leading
From 6th to 14th of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following shall apply:
“A. On February 1, 2012, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Defendant agreed on the Defendant’s direct responsibility for all expenses incurred by the Plaintiff in the course of performing the tasks of the Credit Transferee; and (b) the Plaintiff’s total expenses incurred from July 2005 to February 2015 to KRW 187,658,664; and (c) the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said KRW 187,658,664.
B. According to the reasoning of the evidence No. 14, the agreement entered between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on February 1, 2012.