beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant C is KRW 38,00,000 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 13, 2015 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 16, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a construction entrustment agreement with Defendant B to take overall charge of the affairs related to the reconstruction, etc. of the apartment house located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, with the introduction of Defendant C on October 16, 2012.
B. Accordingly, on October 18, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,000,000 to Defendant B as business promotion expenses, etc., and paid KRW 38,000,000 in total to Defendant C several times from October 30, 2012 to February 6, 2013.
C. However, the above tenement house was virtually a reconstruction project due to the opposition of some owners.
[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 2 through 5, Evidence No. 7, Evidence No. 1 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 45,000,000 to the plaintiff, while deceiving the plaintiff under the pretext of reconstruction, etc.
The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, and there is no other evidence to prove it. The plaintiff's statement is without merit. The plaintiff's statement is without merit.
B. Whether unjust enrichment is recognized or not, however, if the reconstruction project of this case was not carried out by arranging the plaintiff's above assertion, it is so examined to the purport that the plaintiff sought the return of unjust enrichment as to the part where the plaintiff suffered losses and made profits by the defendants.
According to the above facts, in relation to the reconstruction project of this case, Defendant B was paid KRW 7,00,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C was paid KRW 38,000,000 to the Plaintiff respectively. Since the reconstruction project of this case was not conducted, Defendant B was obligated to return KRW 7,00,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C was obligated to return KRW 38,00,000 to the Plaintiff, respectively.
For this reason,