부당이득금반환
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.
Basic Facts
On December 18, 2014, at around 01:10 on December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff left the site without taking any particular measures after shocking the DNA boarding car driven by the Defendant while driving the private taxi.
Upon the investigation into the above accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,500,000 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and the prosecutor indicted the Plaintiff on the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) and the Road Traffic Act (Non-accidenting Measures) and issued a summary order of KRW 5,00,000 against the Plaintiff.
In the formal trial procedure conducted by the Plaintiff against the above summary order, this court found the Defendant not guilty on the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) on the ground that the charge was not proven that there was a need for relief measures, but found the Defendant guilty on the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Non-accidenting Measures).
Although the prosecutor appealed against the above judgment, the appeal was dismissed on June 29, 2016, and the prosecutor renounced the appeal and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 7, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the ground for claim of the whole argument, the defendant alleged that the defendant threatened the plaintiff to cancel the plaintiff's individual taxi business license, and submitted a false diagnosis to the prosecutor in the investigation process against the plaintiff.
The plaintiff paid the agreed money to the prosecutor on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) on the ground that the prosecutor would not prosecute the plaintiff when paying the agreed money in an economically poor situation. The prosecutor was not only prosecuted the plaintiff but also acquitted the above crime.
Therefore, the agreement on the payment of the agreed amount of this case is stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Code.