(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.09.05 2018나66706

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.09.05 2018나66706

부당이득금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 28, 2010, a contract for change of the name of a mobile phone and a sales contract for terminal device in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant contract”) was concluded with the Defendant. The instant contract contains both the Plaintiff’s resident registration number and address, and the number of national bank accounts in the name of the Plaintiff, and the copy of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is attached thereto.

B. From May 24, 2010 to July 21, 2016, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 3,548,800 from the national bank account in the name of the Plaintiff at the communications fee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff did not conclude the instant contract with the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to withdraw the communications fee from the account in the name of the Plaintiff to return KRW 3,548,800 as unjust enrichment.

B. The plaintiff directly entered into the contract of this case with the defendant, and even if not, the defendant believed that he had the authority to conclude the contract of this case on behalf of the plaintiff, and there is a justifiable reason to believe that the contract of this case is valid.

In addition, the Plaintiff ratified the instant contract by paying long-term communication fees.

3. Determination

A. As seen earlier, the fact that the contract of this case was prepared in the name of the plaintiff between the defendant and the defendant as to the cause of the claim is examined. However, as long as there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff's signature stated in the contract of this case is written (it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff's signature stated in the contract of this case is deemed to be different from the plaintiff's written signature, according to the result of written appraisal by the appraiser C), the contract of this case contains the plaintiff's personal information or the account number in the name of the plaintiff.

or a copy of the plaintiff's driver's license is attached.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.28 2015가단7358

-서울북부지방법원 2015.12.22 2014가단46751

-대구지방법원 2020.09.01 2019나314337

-서울남부지방법원 2019.11.22 2019가단219766

-대전지방법원 2015.08.26 2014가단43882