beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.11.30 2016가단1204

부당이득금반환 및 손해배상

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 7, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with D (hereinafter “D”) on subparagraph (a) of the shopping mall store sold by D, and paid KRW 87,823,07 in total as lease deposit and development expenses.

B. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D with the Incheon District Court 2004Kadan62954, which was the employee of the shopping mall sales agency, for return of unjust enrichment and claim for damages. On December 16, 2005, the above court rendered a favorable judgment of the plaintiff that "D shall pay to the plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from January 11, 2004 to the date of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive on January 12, 2006.

C. Defendant B was the representative director from July 13, 2005 to February 22, 2007, and Defendant C was the director from March 12, 199 to February 22, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is still not receiving a judgment amount from D.

Defendant B’s representative director, Defendant C’s director and actual management owner, who incurred damages to the Plaintiff during the performance of duties related to the shopping mall lease agreement. As such, the Defendants are obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 87,823,077 and the delay damages therefrom pursuant to Article 35 of the Civil Act or Article 401 of the Commercial Act.

In addition, the Defendants are obligated to return the above money deposited in D as unjust enrichment because they have misappropriated or illegally obtained the above money.

B. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.