(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.17 2019나187 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.17 2019나187

부당이득금반환

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant B, from August 22, 2018, regarding the amount of KRW 4,000,000.

Reasons

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff decided to purchase Bosch Rexroth from D upon the introduction of the defendants, and paid 84 million won to D, but D did not deliver Bosch Rexroth to the plaintiff, and as a result, D was convicted of fraud (U.S. District Court Decision 2017Da2788, Suwon District Court Decision 2017No8269, Suwon District Court Decision 2018Do6537, Feb. 2, 2018; Supreme Court Decision 2018Do6537, Feb. 4, 200; Defendant C stated that the defendants would incur fees as above at the time of the investigation by the investigation agency; Defendant C did not have stated that the above 1.5 million won was not to be used at the time of the investigation by the investigation agency.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obligated to return the amount of money to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment, since they gain monetary profits without any legal ground and thereby, have incurred damages equivalent to the amount of money equivalent to the plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant B, as requested by the Plaintiff, is obligated to pay each of the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 17, 2018, the day following the day on which the copy of the complaint of this case was served to Defendant B as requested by the Plaintiff, and from August 22, 2018, the day following the day when the copy of the complaint of this case was served to Defendant C as requested by the Plaintiff, and from October 17, 2018, from the day following the day when the copy of the complaint of this case was served to Defendant C, to the day of full payment.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is accepted for each of the grounds, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions. Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and it is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-청주지방법원제천지원 2020.05.06 2018가단21421

-서울남부지방법원 2015.01.15 2014가단207621

-수원지방법원여주지원 2016.07.05 2015가단11283

-대전지방법원 2020.02.05 2019가단130736