beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.05.29 2013가합6548

부당이득금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is the omission of C.

The Plaintiff lent C KRW 50 million on March 19, 2013, KRW 210 million on April 15, 2013, and KRW 260 million on a total.

B. On March 19, 2013, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with D to purchase the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the purchase price of KRW 352 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On April 15, 2013, the ownership transfer registration was made in the Defendant’s name on the grounds of the instant sales contract.

On April 15, 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 170 million from Han Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “one Bank”) as collateral the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant loan”). Accordingly, the registration of establishment of a collateral for the instant real estate was completed with respect to the instant real estate as the maximum debt amount of KRW 2.4 billion, the debtor, the Defendant, and the collateral security bank.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 5 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff has a loan claim of KRW 260 million against C.

The instant real estate was intended for C to purchase, and the Defendant received KRW 352 million from C in accordance with the contract title trust agreement concluded between the Defendant and C, and then purchased the instant real estate from D in good faith regarding the said title trust agreement.

Therefore, C has a claim for return of unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 352 million against the Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiff by subrogation of C, sought payment of KRW 260 million out of the above KRW 352 million, and damages for delay.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the existence of the preserved claim, the Plaintiff has a loan claim of KRW 260 million against C. Thus, the existence of the preserved claim is recognized.

B. The Plaintiff whether the subrogation claim exists, CA.