beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims that the court changed in exchange are all dismissed.
2. Action.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff recruited 16 members from May 2012 to September 2013, 2013, and operated the 20 million won winning contract (hereinafter “instant winning contract”).
B. C who joined the winning bid of the instant case as a fraternity was awarded a successful bid amounting to KRW 6 million with the winning bid interest in June 2012, and KRW 14 million with the winning bid interest in the instant case.
C. On June 29, 2012, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 12.7 million in the Defendant’s account (the amount obtained by deducting KRW 6 million from the successful bid interest of KRW 20 million and KRW 1.3 million borrowed from the Plaintiff for the payment of the single deposit).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, testimony of party witness C and purport of whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment as to the plaintiff
A. The main point of the plaintiff's argument is that the defendant, after the defendant lent the name of C and joined the successful bid bid of this case, acquired money by deceiving the plaintiff as if he received money delegated by C, and thus, he is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the above amount as compensation for damages caused by the tort, and even if the defendant's act does not constitute tort, even if it does not constitute tort, the defendant is not a member of the successful bid bid of this case operated by the plaintiff, and thus, he is obligated to return it as unjust enrichment.
B. According to the evidence No. 2, even though the Plaintiff deposited KRW 12,70,00 with the Defendant’s account on June 29, 2012, the following circumstances are acknowledged as follows, namely, the witness C testified that he/she actually joined the successful bid of this case as a leader for his/her necessity, and the Plaintiff was a friendly relationship with C before he/she joined the successful bid of this case, and C requested the Defendant to request the Defendant by seeking the prisoner of war of this case.