logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.11.02 2016가단16382
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. (1) As between January 201, 2016 and March 2016, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 200 million to C for the purpose of operating funds of the company. On March 2, 2016, and on March 28, 2016, a notary public made a notarial deed of a monetary loan contract with a total amount of KRW 200 million over two occasions.

(2) C did not use the money borrowed from the Plaintiff as the company’s operating capital. From January 26, 2016 to April 8, 2016, C transferred KRW 597,220,127 from the Defendant’s national bank account to the Defendant’s national bank account.

(3) The defendant, in collusion with C, intended to acquire money borrowed from the plaintiff from the beginning without using it as the corporate operating fund. Accordingly, the defendant must return 200 million won to the plaintiff due to the return of unjust enrichment.

2. The term "money loan for consumption" means an agreement by which one of the parties agrees to transfer the ownership of the money to the other party (Article 598 of the Civil Act), and the money transferred to the borrower under a loan for consumption may be freely disposed of by the borrower as its own property;

In this case, C borrowed KRW 200 million from the Plaintiff to the Defendant’s account for the purpose of the Company’s operation funds, and C transferred money above the borrowed money from the account to the Defendant account.

Even if the defendant gains profits from the plaintiff's property without any legal ground and thereby causes loss to the plaintiff (Article 741 of the Civil Act), the defendant's right to claim restitution of unjust enrichment is established (Article 741 of the Civil Act). The evidence of the plaintiff's submission alone conspired with C for the purpose

It is insufficient to recognize that the defendant obtained benefits from the plaintiff's property without any legal ground, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise, and thus, the plaintiff's assertion is not acceptable.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow