logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.11.02 2016가단50750
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 9, 1995, the Plaintiff married with the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) and became a legally married couple. The Deceased died on February 17, 2012.

On the other hand, the defendant is a child between the deceased and the former.

B. On August 18, 1997, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of “sale on March 21, 1997.” On May 17, 2005, “Sale on May 12, 2005.” On January 4, 2012, the Defendant sold the instant real estate to F in KRW 77,000,000,000 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 16th of the same month.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant real estate was purchased from around 1989 to operate a restaurant, etc., and then completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the deceased, and the deceased transferred the instant real estate to the Defendant without the consent of the Plaintiff.

After that, on July 2011, the Plaintiff would dispose of the instant real estate in order to raise the hospital expenses of the Deceased, etc., and the Defendant would first pay KRW 20,000,000, and later, would dispose of the instant real estate if the price is wrong.

However, on January 4, 2012, the Defendant sold the instant real estate to F in 77,00,000,000, even though it was well aware that the instant real estate was the Plaintiff’s property trusted in title to the Deceased. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount of KRW 57,00,000 calculated by subtracting the amount of KRW 20,000,000, which was paid from the purchase price of KRW 77,000,00, and the interest for delay thereof as compensation for tort due to unjust enrichment return or breach of trust.

B. Therefore, first of all, whether the instant real estate was owned by the Plaintiff in title trust with the Deceased, the circumstances revealed by each description of the Health Team, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 11, 12, 13, and 15, namely, the Deceased.

arrow