logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.06.08 2017가합60
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are children born between the deceased E (FF, hereinafter “the deceased”) and G (Divorce on July 20, 2013) as the former wife of the deceased.

As the Deceased died on December 24, 2016, the Plaintiffs inherited their respective shares of 1/3.

B. The Deceased set up a collateral security amount of KRW 330 million with respect to H and I land and building in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the maximum debt amount of KRW 330 million, and set up a marina loan account (hereinafter “the instant marina account”) from the following.

C. On December 14, 2016, KRW 230 million was transferred from the instant marina account to the Defendant’s account.

(B) From the following day, the payment of the instant case was made (based on recognition) / The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap 1 through 4 (including number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. On December 14, 2016, 100 days before the death of the deceased, the Defendant made the payment of the instant case to the Red Agricultural Co., Ltd.’s office.

The above act committed by the Defendant constitutes a crime of unjust enrichment (Article 349(1) of the Criminal Act) by taking advantage of the deceased’s poor condition (Article 349(1)) or a quasi-Fraud by taking advantage of the deceased’s mental and physical disorder (Article 348(1) of the Criminal Act).

Therefore, the Deceased’s claim for damages due to a tort against the Defendant was filed, and the Plaintiffs inherited each of one-third shares. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay each of the Plaintiffs KRW 76,66,66 (=20 million x 1/3, and less than KRW 1/3, and hereinafter the same shall apply) and damages for delay.

In electively, the deposited money in this case was made in return for the preexisting and future illness, and thus constitutes an onerous donation. Since there is a remarkable imbalance between the Defendant’s disease and 230 million won against the Deceased, the above-paid donation is made by the Deceased.

arrow