부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 19, 2012, the Plaintiff leased to C the Plaintiff-owned building at KRW 36 million as lease deposit and monthly rent of KRW 3.6 million, which was the content that the Plaintiff renewed the previous lease contract (a lease deposit amounting to KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 3 million).
B. On December 20, 2012, the Defendant entered into a new lease agreement with the Plaintiff on condition that C acquires the claim for the refund of the lease deposit against the Plaintiff, which is KRW 36 million and monthly rent of KRW 3.6 million.
C. On January 20, 2013, the Defendant transferred the Defendant’s claim for the refund of the lease deposit against the Plaintiff to E, and on the same day, the Plaintiff and E are above the building.
The lease contract was entered into under the same conditions as the entry in the port.
On the other hand, on December 27, 2012, F, a creditor of the above C, was issued a collection order for the claim for the refund of the lease deposit against the Plaintiff at the Suwon District Court Sung-nam Branch 2012TT 16000.
E. After that, on February 11, 2014 between the Plaintiff and the F and the said F, mediation was concluded that “the Plaintiff would pay F KRW 16,160,000 to F by April 10, 2014,” related to the Suwon District Court 2013Na2939, and the Plaintiff deposited the amount equivalent to the said amount on April 16, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 to 5, 8, 11 to 15 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 15,160,000 (i.e., KRW 16,160,000 - litigation cost 1,000,000) due to F’s exercise of F’s right to collect, and the Defendant could not oppose F’s claim attachment and collection order, but could not oppose F’s claim attachment and collection order, thereby gaining profits equivalent to the above KRW 15,160,000 by transferring the entire claim for the refund of the lease deposit to E on January 20, 2013 and receiving the money equivalent thereto without any legal grounds, and thus, the Defendant was equivalent to the above amount.