임금
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. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant was the head of B, who was working as the Plaintiff-owned vessel B, and received dividends of KRW 45,232,968 in excess of 16,524,567 in the Busan District Court C, D (Duals) auction procedure.
As a result, the defendant gains a profit equivalent to 16,524,567 won without any legal ground. Since the plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to the same amount, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unjust enrichment amounting to 16,524,567 won and damages for delay.
2. Since the execution of distribution according to the distribution schedule that became final and conclusive does not confirm the rights under substantive law, if a non-right holder received the distribution in the distribution procedure, this would be deemed to have made unjust enrichment without any legal grounds.
However, it cannot be said that even if a person who suffered a loss due to this, was a person who would have received a distribution if he did not mislead the distribution, or there was a person who would have received a distribution of the following order of priority, it shall
(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da53230 delivered on October 10, 200, etc.) In light of the above legal principles, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the description of the evidence No. 6 and the overall purport of the pleadings, the claim amount of the Efa 1406 securitization limited liability company, which is the third-order creditor of the dividend procedure, is KRW 3,514,618,560, and the maximum claim amount is KRW 90 million, but the dividend amount is KRW 68,372,101.
In light of this, even if the defendant received dividends in excess of the dividends without any legal ground in the above distribution procedure, the person who suffered losses therefrom shall be deemed as a specialized securitization limited company 1406 Efaia, which would have received additional dividends if the dividends were not erroneous, and otherwise, unless there is any ground to deem that the above excess dividends should belong to the plaintiff who is the debtor, the plaintiff shall not be deemed to have suffered losses.
Therefore, the plaintiff's status.