logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.08.24 2016나1360
부당이득금반환등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is liable to pay the plaintiff the sum of 253,600 won for the above 253,736 won for mental damage and the sum of 259,736 won for the above 253,60 won for the plaintiff's unjust enrichment, since the plaintiff purchased ice 1,600 won for spring clothes sold by the defendants, but he requested ice 1 to the defendants in his ice, and the defendant did not return the ice 1 but did not return the plaintiff's personal information without the plaintiff's permission and requested deliberation to the Korea Consumption Research Institute. Thus, the defendants are liable to pay the plaintiff the sum of 253,600 won for the above 29,736 won for mental damage and damages.

The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the existence of ice or defect in the iceet or the facts of defamation against the plaintiff's will as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, according to the overall purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 4, 5, 11, and 12 as well as the whole pleadings, the plaintiff sent the defendant's head office to the Korea Consumption and Living Research Institute through its head office in order to confirm the defects of the plaintiff's request for refund, etc., and the Korean Consumption and Living Research Institute answers to the purport that the plaintiff's behavior (a pressure) not the defendant's side appears to have occurred, and it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendants as defamation, but a non-prosecution disposition was issued without any suspicion. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is dismissed without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow