beta
Text
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim is that the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate in title trust with the Defendant, so the Defendant shall complete the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate according to the termination of the title trust agreement. The Plaintiff paid insurance premium for G substitute insurance with the network F and de facto marriage. The network F and the above insurance money were verbally used by the Plaintiff and the Deceased. After F’s death, the Defendant, who is the deceased’s child, received the above insurance money without authority, and the Defendant, as a de facto spouse, has the right to return unjust enrichment, and at least,
2. We examine the judgment. The plaintiff should conclude a title trust agreement with the defendant on each of the real estate of this case and prove that the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the real estate of this case has been completed, and there is no evidence to prove that this part of the claim is without merit.
In addition, according to the statements in Eul evidence 7-1 to 5, the fact that the deceased F is designated as the plaintiff on May 8, 2012 when he/she purchased a variable insurance contract, and the beneficiary is designated as the network F. The beneficiary is designated as the network F. The net F. The insured paid the premium of KRW 31.6 million per month from around that time to November 2018. The defendant is the heir of the network F. On June 14, 2019, and received the termination refund of KRW 16,117,501 after the termination of the insurance contract and offsetting the existing insurance contract loans.
According to the above facts, the above policyholder and beneficiary are the deceased F, and the defendant, the inheritor of the deceased, terminated the above insurance contract and received the termination refund, and even if the plaintiff paid part of the insurance premium of the above insurance contract, the plaintiff did not have the right to receive the termination refund, so the defendant did not make unjust enrichment against the plaintiff.
In addition, a de facto spouse is not a legal inheritor.