beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.09 2015가단197923

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff alleged that he should remit money to C by mistake, and the ownership of KRW 3 million that the plaintiff wrongfully remitted to C is the plaintiff, and three million won out of the amount distributed to the defendant was erroneously distributed without title. Thus, the distribution schedule should be revised.

2. The account transfer of judgment is a means of safe and prompt movement of funds at low cost through the remittance procedure between banks and bank stores, and for the smooth handling of large amounts of funds between many people, a bank acting as a broker is a system that performs such act without involvement in the existence, contents, etc. of legal relations which are the cause of each change of funds.

Therefore, in a case where a cash transfer or account transfer was made, only the basic terms and conditions of deposit transaction that would be a deposit at the time when the deposit was recorded in the ledger, and barring special circumstances, such as the existence of legal relations between the remitter and the payee as to the formation of the deposit contract between the remitter and the bank in the deposit transaction, the remitter shall be deemed to have established a deposit contract equivalent to the amount of the account transfer between the remitter and the bank in the deposit transaction, regardless of whether there exists legal relations between the remitter and the payee as to the cause of account transfer, and the payee shall be construed to have acquired the deposit claim equivalent to the above amount of the account transfer.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da51239, Nov. 29, 2007; Supreme Court Decision 2005Da59673, Mar. 24, 2006). In such a case, the remitter has the right to claim the return of unjust enrichment against the payee, and it does not mean that the remitter has the right to prevent the transfer of the above deposit claim. Thus, the obligee of the payee did not acquire the right to prevent the transfer of the above deposit claim.