부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to Cro-vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff-vehicle”).
B. At around 20:55 on February 6, 2014, D driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the intersection of Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-do, to the intersection of the tea hospital distance. On the other hand, D failed to properly examine the traffic situation of the vehicle that intended to change the course from the intersection of the intersection to the two-lane, and, on the other hand, shocked the front right-hand part of the FF Driving GFD car driven along the two-lane (hereinafter “Defendant”) with the rear even and pents on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). At that time, the Defendant used the Defendant’s vehicle as well as the F driver’s license.
C. The Defendants complained of the pains, etc. due to the instant accident, and received treatment from the other party members, etc.
By May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,267,100 in total for A’s medical expenses, and KRW 2,214,160 in total for B’s medical expenses and agreed amount until April 23, 2014.
[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entries or videos of Gap's 1 to 3, and 5 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s alleged Defendants asserted that they suffered injury despite the absence of injury due to the instant accident, and received medical treatment from the hospital and received insurance proceeds from the Plaintiff, thereby causing damage equivalent to the same amount to the Plaintiff, and thus, are obligated to return each insurance proceeds and damages incurred therefrom as unjust enrichment.
3. In a lawsuit claiming the return of unjust enrichment, the burden of proving the fact that the general establishment requirement of unjust enrichment was made without any legal cause shall be borne by the person claiming the return.
I would like to say.
(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da21444 delivered on October 24, 1997, and Supreme Court Decision 98Da61593 delivered on April 27, 199). Welves, A.