beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B’s KRW 8,973,900 and its annual rate from August 1, 2014 to March 13, 2015, respectively.
Reasons
1. On August 1, 2014, the Plaintiff, who was misrepresented with the staff of the prosecutor’s office, was called “the Plaintiff entered the account number, password, etc. in the name of the Plaintiff in E, which is the website of the prosecutor’s office.” The Plaintiff entered the Internet banking managed information in the above website by using the Internet banking managed information collected by deceiving the Plaintiff, and then transferred KRW 6,021,350 to the account in the name of Defendant B, 2,952,550 to the corporate bank account, and KRW 6,051,250 to the corporate bank account in the name of Defendant C, and KRW 6,025,530 to the corporate bank account in the name of Defendant C, and KRW 6,051,250 to the corporate bank account in the name of Defendant C.
(hereinafter “instant Bophishing.” The Defendants seek payment of money equivalent to the amount transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the Plaintiff’s account due to unjust enrichment or joint tort.
2. For Defendant B and C: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).
3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D
A. The portion of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment is that, in a case where the benefiting of the benefiting party did not have any legal cause, the duty of return is imposed on the benefiting party on the basis of the principle of fairness and justice, but if the benefiting party does not have any substantial benefit
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da37325, 37332, Sept. 8, 201). As to the part exceeding KRW 30,730 of the balance recognized as a result of the order to submit financial transaction information to Korea Post by this court, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that Defendant D acquired it substantially, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
B. Where an electronic financial transaction is conducted through a means of access to a claim for tort, the legal effect by such electronic financial transaction is the means of access.