logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.03.05 2014가단14296
부당이득금반환
Text

1. Defendant D’s KRW 2,262,60, and the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from December 10, 2010 to April 10, 2014.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The plaintiff is operated by the K K station located in Syang-si.

L, an employee of the Kju station operated by the Plaintiff, transferred each of the following money to the Defendants through the U.S. Agricultural Account (Account NumberO; hereinafter “instant account”) in the name of his M (former N) from February 16, 2010 to December 9, 2010.

(Transfers was made in 2010, set aside only the month and day which remitted. Defendant B: November 250, 100,000 won, October 19, 100,000 won:

8.2.350,000 won;

9.7.1 million won, October 990, 100 won, and November 17, 1000 won: Defendant D:

2. Defendant E: 16.701,300 won, 10.25 1,561,300 won:

5.1,741,300 Defendant F:

4. Defendant G: (a) filed a complaint that KRW 26,381,00,00 on May 1, 11; (b) KRW 10,000 on June 1, 12; and (c) KRW 595,980 on September 19, 12: Defendant H: Defendant I: Defendant I: December 3, 19, the Plaintiff filed a complaint that KRW 26,381,00,00,000, including the gas supply price in the K K oil station from August 6, 2010 to December 13, 2010, the Plaintiff was indicted for occupational embezzlement of KRW 26,381,00,00 in total, including the gas supply price in the K oil station (L was concealed by embezzlement of KRW 5,95,980 on December 14, 201).

(In the process of the above investigation, L was confirmed to have been engaged in occupational embezzlement and escape of KRW 400 million in the same way in Quju station located in the Seo-gu P, Seoul, on February 2, 2007). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap, 2, 4, Eul, and Eul are described in each of subparagraphs 1, 5, 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the money deposited in the account of this case, which is the cause of the plaintiff's assertion of the whole purport of the argument, is the money which L was useful in the plaintiff's account or was remitted the oil amount to be paid by the plaintiff, and the defendants are obligated to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff without any legal cause.

Defendant B’s assertion by the Defendants is in existence against L.

arrow