부당이득금반환
1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s appeal and the preliminary claim added at the trial are dismissed, respectively.
2. Filing an appeal;
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (1) between 4, 11 and 12 of the first instance court's decision.
(2) Sections 8 through 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.
This is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, other than those used as mentioned in the same paragraph, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. A portion used for adding or cutting;
A. Accordingly, the Defendant shall transfer the dividend payment claim as indicated in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff and the Appointed C, and if the Defendant had already received the above claim, it shall return the claim amount as preliminaryly, the claim amount of KRW 43,945,134, and damages for delay after the date of receipt thereof, as unjust enrichment.
B. We examine the argument as to res judicata as to the claim of this case by the plaintiff and the selected party C, and the claim of this case by the plaintiff and the selected party C, on the premise that the claim of this case was unjust enrichment, which the defendant acquired in addition to the existing amount of dividends by the defendant in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution. The existence and scope of the right to receive dividends in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution becomes final and conclusive on the basis of the aggregate amount of the principal of the claim of distribution in the relevant auction case and the interest or damages for delay up to the date of distribution. Thus, the existence and scope of the right to receive dividends should be determined by considering the existence and priority of each claim of distribution based on the premise that the interest or damages for delay from August 28, 2012, which is the date of distribution in the above auction case, should be determined only on the basis of the interest or damages for delay up to August 28, 2012, which is the date of distribution in the above auction case. Thus, since the interest or damages for delay after the above date of distribution, after the above date should be considered at all in determining the existence and scope.