beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.21 2017가합546120

부당이득금

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is a non-corporate group organized by the Plaintiff as nine persons asserting to represent the fishermen damaged by the “Caccident” that occurred around December 7, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”) due to the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”).

In the assessment judgment conducted pursuant to the Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage Guarantee Act and the Act on the Procedure for Limiting the Liability of Shipowners, etc., the assessment judgment rendered that the damage claim reported by the damaged fishermen was not fully recognized or partially recognized.

On February 4, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a delegation agreement with the Defendant to pay a total of KRW 404,200,000 (i.e., KRW 30,000 x 13,476 x value-added tax separately), and an amount obtained by multiplying the amount quoted in a judgment or settlement with performance remuneration by 7% (excluding value-added tax) (hereinafter “instant delegation agreement”). Around February 4, 2013, the Plaintiff delegated the Defendant with the authority to receive the settlement amount, etc., and entered into an agreement with the Defendant (Evidence 4; hereinafter “instant delegation agreement”).

The Defendant submitted a letter of delegation (Evidence A No. 14) to the court where the instant lawsuit is pending. The scope of delegation indicated in the letter of delegation was included in the right to receive judgment money, etc., and the decision of recommending reconciliation citing the total amount of KRW 9,907,032,120 among the damaged fishermen from August 2015 to November 2015 in the instant lawsuit divided into several cases became final and conclusive.

The Defendant received the money from the other party to the instant lawsuit in accordance with the decision of recommending reconciliation (hereinafter referred to as “reconciliation of this case”).

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, evidence Nos. 3, 4, 8, 14, and 18.