logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2015.09.03 2014가단7252
부당이득금반환등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 4,800 and, with respect thereto, KRW 5% per annum from March 6, 2015 to September 3, 2015, and the following:

Reasons

1. On July 8, 2014, the Plaintiff received the letters in the name of Nonghyup who lent money with low interest at KRW 15:00,00, and called to the name bearers (F) and demanded that the Plaintiff deposit money in the bank because of lack of credit rating. On the 10th of the same month, the Plaintiff wired KRW 6.7 million to the post office account of Defendant B, KRW 3.3 million to the Central Saemaul Depository account of Defendant C, and KRW 7 million to the Defendant D’s SK securities account on the 11st of the same month.

Afterwards, the Plaintiff requested another person who is in charge of asset management work to deposit in addition to KRW 10 million from another person who is another person who is in charge of asset management work, and transferred KRW 10 million to Defendant E’s bank account on the 14th of the same month.

(hereinafter “instant Bophishing.” The Defendants primarily seek for payment of money equivalent to the amount transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the Plaintiff’s account in compensation for unjust enrichment and conjunctive tort.

2. For defendant D: Judgment without holding any pleadings (Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. As to Defendant E: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

4. Determination as to claims against Defendant B and C

A. The portion of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment is that, in a case where the benefiting of the benefiting party did not have any legal cause, the duty of return is imposed on the benefiting party on the basis of the principle of fairness and justice, but if the benefiting party does not have any substantial benefit

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da37325, 37332, Sept. 8, 201). According to the Plaintiff’s statement No. 3-1 as to Defendant B, and the overall purport of this court’s order to submit financial transaction information to Korea Post, as well as the result of and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 6.7 million to Defendant B’s post office account on July 10, 2014.

However, before the plaintiff remitted 6.7 million won to the post office account, the balance of the account was 6.10 won, and it was from the account.

arrow