예금반환
209Gahap10212 Return of deposits
BOO
Credit Unions
. 22. 209
January 12, 2010
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 25,00,000 won with 4.4% per annum from April 28, 2005 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment, and the amount calculated with 6.24% per annum from April 22, 2002 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case from April 22, 2002 to the day of complete payment, and with 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment, the amount calculated with 15,00,000 won and the amount calculated with 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 21, 2001, Nonparty A, an employee of the Defendant Union, borrowed from the Defendant Union the name of Nonparty D, Nonparty D, Nonparty E and Nonparty F, the wife of Nonparty C and Nonparty C, the wife of Nonparty C, and deposited KRW 50,000,00 each year for a deposit period of one year. The Plaintiff’s seal impression in the column of the deposit passbook is affixed.
B. On April 22, 2002, A terminated each of the deposits listed in the above paragraph (a) after the end of the deposit period, and thereafter deposited KRW 50,000,000 in the name of B, C, D, E, and F to the Defendant Union for one year on the same day, and deposited KRW 20,000,000 in the aggregate of KRW 17.504,120,000 interest on the said five deposits with the Plaintiff’s seal affixed thereto for one year. The Plaintiff’s seal impression was affixed to the column for the seal imprint of the above G’s deposit passbook.
C. A, after the end of the deposit period on April 26, 2003, after the end of the above deposit period, B, C, D, E, and F
After the termination of the deposit in the name of the defendant union, the same amount of KRW 50,000,000 for one year each in the name of E, F, and B, and instead of the name of C and D, the deposit amount of KRW 50,000,00 for each of the names of the non-party H. I, the C and D, in the name of H.I, instead of the name of C and D, was deposited in one year. The Plaintiff’s seal impression is affixed to each of the respective column of the deposit passbook in the name of H. I.
D. On April 27, 2004, A terminated each of the deposits listed in the above sub-paragraph (c) above after the end of the deposit period, and thereafter deposited 45,000,000 won, excluding each of the above deposits 5,000,000 won, in the name of the Defendant Union for one year, E, F, B, and H. I.
E. A, even after the end of the deposit period on April 28, 2005, deposited 45,000,000 each of the deposits listed in the foregoing paragraph (d) in the name of the Defendant Union for one year, E, F, B, H. I.
F. On July 28, 2003, A deposited 15,000,000 won in the account of Nonparty J, the president of the Defendant Union, at the time of the deposit of the said account. After the termination of December 19, 2003, the said investment was deposited in the account of Nonparty J’s investment.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 7 evidence, Eul 1 to 4 evidence (including each number in the case of additional evidence) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion
The plaintiff asserts that the amount of KRW 245,00,000 (hereinafter referred to as "each of the deposits of this case and each of the savings accounts of this case") and the amount of KRW 15,00,000 (hereinafter referred to as "the investment of this case and the instant investment account") in the respective deposit contracts in the name of E, F, B, and H.I. G is made out of the funds contributed by the plaintiff. Since the above deposits and investments are the actual owners of each of the above deposits and investments, the defendant union is obligated to pay each of the deposits and investments of this case to the plaintiff.
B. Determination
In the event that a deposit contract is concluded through the real name verification procedure under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality and the fact is clearly indicated in the deposit contract statement, it would be reasonable to interpret that the deposit title holder, the person acting for him/her, and the intent of the financial institution will be the party to the deposit contract. Notwithstanding the fact that the deposit title holder’s real name verification procedure is made according to the intent of the deposit title holder, and the deposit title holder’s statement was prepared, it is difficult to deny the right to claim the deposit from the deposit title holder, and it is extremely exceptional to the Plaintiff’s right to claim the return of the deposit from the deposit title holder, and it is difficult to determine that the deposit title holder’s funds would be attributed to the Plaintiff and the fund contributor, etc. under the above real name verification procedure under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the deposit title holder, the deposit title holder, and the financial institution’s identity on behalf of him/her would be sufficient to reverse the probative value of the deposit contract prepared through the real name verification procedure under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.
presiding judge, judge-type;
The number of judges
Judges South-Name