logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.09.08 2016가단23813
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased from the Defendant the amount of KRW 350 million on the day of the contract; (b) the down payment of KRW 35 million on the day of the contract; and (c) the remainder of KRW 315 million on January 30, 2015, the Plaintiff paid each of the remainder of KRW 300 million on December 30, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.

On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff paid a sales contract of KRW 35 million to the Defendant; thereafter, the Plaintiff paid KRW 45 million on January 13, 2015, KRW 25 million on April 2, 2015, and KRW 20 million on October 30, 2015, respectively; on April 2, 2015, the Plaintiff subrogated for the Defendant’s bank loan obligations of KRW 269,90,000,000 in lieu of payment of the purchase price.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3 (including a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 390 million exceeding KRW 350,000,000,000,000,000 for the purchase price of this case by mistake, and the Defendant shall return the difference to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. Prior to the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Defendant already sold the instant real estate to Nonparty D and received the down payment of KRW 35 million. The Defendant concluded the instant sales contract by requesting the Plaintiff to conclude the instant sales contract with the Plaintiff’s own burden to pay the cancellation money to D. Since the money additionally paid by the Plaintiff was paid to D as the cancellation money to the former buyer, there was no money to be returned to the Plaintiff.

3. The judgment is based on the facts that the money paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant exceeds KRW 390,000,000 of the purchase price of this case and KRW 350,000,000 are acknowledged as above.

However, in full view of the statements in Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, witness D's testimony, the result of this court's order to submit financial transaction information to the Chief of Bocheon-dong Branch, the fact-finding reply against the Daecheon-dong Branch of the Supreme Court, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant is

arrow