logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.07.08 2019나40315
부당이득금반환
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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a member of E Caf F (G; hereinafter “instant Kaf”) who has joined the E Caf (G; hereinafter “Defendant Company”) that sells middle or new products U.S. electronic products to its members by buying agency, and the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) entered into an entrustment contract around 2012 with H (O) who is an operator of the said Kaf and entered into the entrustment contract on around 2012, and received the purchase price for electronic products through the said Kaf and other domestic products that H raised, and Defendant D was a director of the Defendant Company from February 2015 to May 2019.

B. On September 30, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) reported the letters of new goods and other joint purchases published by H in the instant car page, and applied for a purchase agency for the said car page; (b) around October 5, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 1.190,00 to the Defendant Company’s National Bank Account (L) as the remittance account designated in the said joint purchase notice.

C. On February 6, 2017, the Plaintiff received electronic and other products that applied for purchase agency services, but this was used as used goods with a trace of use, and the value of which does not reach the purchase price.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff returned the electronic and other documents to H through the Defendant Company, and demanded H to refund, but H did not comply with this.

On the other hand, on May 13, 2017, H posted an official notice to the effect that “The normal operation of the car page is difficult in the present car page in the present situation, such as new orders and estimated suspension of the function of the car page, and closure of the liaison office in Korea,” and interrupted the members’ writing function.

Although the Plaintiff demanded the resolution of the situation on the part of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company did not take any particular measure without responding to the Defendant Company’s reply that “I will not satisfly, contact with the local area, and future contact.”

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 17, and 22.

arrow