부당이득금반환
1. The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff’s cause of the instant claim against the Defendants, on the ground that Nonparty E, who was in charge of the Plaintiff’s management, should pay the local tax and road occupancy and use permit tax for the place of the pertinent charging station, the Plaintiff remitted the Plaintiff totaling KRW 79 million to E. The Plaintiff did not pay the said amount and deducted KRW 44 million from Defendant B, 33,982,220 to Defendant C. Therefore, the Defendants are liable to pay the Plaintiff the said deducted amount.
2. Therefore, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 3, the fact that the deceased E transferred money from the above charging fund account to the account under the name of the defendant C and the private village student Eul, his wife, and there is no counter-proof; however, in light of the following facts, the above fact of recognition alone, in collusion with E, the Defendants embezzled the fund of the charging station.
for any reason, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff is liable to return or pay the transferred money to the Plaintiff.
and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
3. Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each statement in the above evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Defendant B merely lent a passbook in the same name of the same defendant to Defendant E, who is bad credit holder, and therefore, Defendant B does not have any money that he/she has transferred from the above passbook to the above passbook. More than anything else, the money transferred from the above passbook in the above passbook in the name of the defendant's name to the above passbook in the above passbook in the above name of the defendant is more than the amount remitted to the above passbook in the above name of the defendant in the above passbook in the above name of the above passbook in the above passbook in the above name of the defendant, and even if the defendant transferred the money that he/she received as the true owner of the passbook in the above name of the passbook in the above name of the defendant, the above defendant is deemed to have returned the money