logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.10 2015나17271
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B reported the Plaintiff’s child C and March 29, 2003.

On May 13, 2004, Defendant National Bank (hereinafter “Defendant Bank”) opened a house subscription deposit account (D) and a savings deposit account (E) in the name of Defendant B in the name of Defendant B. Of them, the deposit amounting to KRW 10 million was deposited in the house subscription deposit account.

B. However, on January 19, 2007, at the time of divorce between C and Defendant B, the Plaintiff terminated the said deposit contract, and on the same day, KRW 10,819,522, including the interest accrued in the said account, deposited in C’s Defendant bank account (F).

C. On February 9, 2007, Defendant B filed a lawsuit seeking the return of KRW 10,636,146 against the Defendant Bank on the ground that the instant deposit was terminated or withdrawn by the Plaintiff without permission on March 5, 2007 (Seoul Central District Court 2007Gada59433, hereinafter “first lawsuit”).

When the Plaintiff received a notice of lawsuit at the request of the Defendant bank during the continuation of the first lawsuit, the Plaintiff returned KRW 10,636,146 on April 12, 2007 to the Defendant bank. Defendant B received KRW 10,636,146 from the Defendant bank on the same day and withdrawn the first lawsuit.

The Plaintiff asserted that the actual contributor to the instant deposit was merely the Plaintiff and was paid to Defendant B while he was merely the title trustee, and that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant B seeking compensation for damages equivalent to the amount of the instant deposit amount, but the judgment was finalized on August 24, 2009 on April 28, 2009 (U.S. District Court 2008Na19925) by the appellate court (U.S. District Court 2008Na1925).

(hereinafter referred to as “second suit”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is merely against the title trustee of the instant deposit, and the actual contributor thereof.

arrow