(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.02.16 2014가단45236

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.02.16 2014가단45236

부당이득금반환

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 September 14, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract agreement (hereinafter “instant subcontract agreement”) with respect to the construction amount for private goods (A1, A4 block, hereinafter “instant construction”) from among the construction works of Young-gu Co., Ltd. and Busan apartment (hereinafter “instant construction works”), setting the construction amount of KRW 789,493,650, and the construction period from October 15, 2008 to February 28, 2009.

B. The Plaintiff was paid the construction cost due to the honorability of the instant construction work from the Young-gu Housing, and was unable to receive KRW 315,779,250 as of December 31, 2009 due to the financial difficulties in Young-gu Housing.

C. The Plaintiff: (a) KRW 147,960,000 on January 8, 2010; and (b) the same year

2. 127,035,500 won was paid in addition to October 127.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence No. 1-3 and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff was not paid the remainder of construction work from the Yeongdeungpo Housing due to the shortage of the funds in the Yeongdeungpo Housing. However, 10% of the remainder of construction work paid by the Defendant, who managed the funds in the Young Housing, as compensation for receiving the remainder of construction work, was demanded to the Plaintiff as rebates. In response to the Defendant’s demand, the Plaintiff paid KRW 14,796,000 equivalent to 10% of the total amount of KRW 147,960,000 paid to the Defendant as compensation for the remainder of construction work on January 8, 2010, the Plaintiff paid KRW 127,035,500, which was paid as the Young Housing on February 10, 2010, respectively.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s payment of rebates by taking advantage of poor status of the Plaintiff constitutes unjust enrichment, and the Defendant should return to the Plaintiff the total of KRW 26,344,681.

B. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion does not have any fact that the Plaintiff demanded rebates, nor received rebates.

C. The fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant paid rebates according to the agreement and the agreement.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2014.12.11 2014노327

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2021.03.11 2020고단993

-서울서부지방법원 2017. 6. 15. 선고 2016노1757 판결

-서울서부지방법원 2019.10.17 2017노1291

-인천지방법원 2013.01.18 2012노2780