logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.05.24 2015나2059786
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s KRW 150,726,966 for the Plaintiff and its related costs from May 31, 2012 to September 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C has served as the representative director from July 2007 to November 201, 2012, and the Defendant is C’s wife and D’s mother.

B. From October 25, 2007 to December 24, 2008 and from June 22, 2011 to May 30, 2012, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 96,116,146 to the new bank account (Account Number E; hereinafter “instant account”) under the name of the Defendant as the salary for the Defendant, and KRW 54,610,820 to the instant account as the salary for D from January 23, 2009 to March 30, 2012, respectively.

C. Defendant and D did not have worked as an employee of the Plaintiff during the period of receiving the above money from the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 6, 7, Gap evidence 11 and 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant: (a) acquired KRW 150,726,966 (the Defendant’s salary 96,116,146 KRW D’s salary 54,610,820 under the Defendant’s salary 96,610,820; hereinafter “the instant money”); and (b) obtained unjust enrichment without any legal grounds, the Defendant is obligated to pay the said money and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff Company was the former representative director, set the salary of KRW 40 million at a lower price, and deposited the remaining salary into the instant account in the name of the Defendant under the name of the Defendant, who was the wife of C. As such, the amount deposited by the Plaintiff to the instant account is C’s pay, and the managing body of the instant account also belongs to C. Thus, the Defendant did not make unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount deposited to the instant account without any legal cause.

3. Determination of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant actually worked as an employee of the Plaintiff Company from January 2009 to May 201, 201, and received benefits from the Plaintiff. The Defendant during the Defendant’s period of service.

arrow