beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff received 24,509,427 won, which the non-party company owned against B, and the interest interest accrued thereon, from the Dongyang Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-party company”), and the non-party company notified the transfer of the claim to B on January 14, 2014.
B. On August 20, 2016, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with C to set the sales price of KRW 156,000,000 with respect to the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) at KRW 101,60,000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant apartment on October 20, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion B (1) donated KRW 28,800,000 out of the purchase price of the instant apartment to the Defendant, who is his/her dependent, in excess of his/her liability, and thus, revoked the donation agreement concluded on August 20, 2016 between B and the Defendant within the limit of KRW 24,509,427 between B and the Defendant, and as such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 24,509,427 and damages for delay.
(2) The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that B donated KRW 28,800,000 to the Defendant out of the purchase price for the apartment of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.
B. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion B concluded a title trust agreement with the Defendant on the claim for return of unjust enrichment, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant on the apartment of this case. Since the above title trust agreement is null and void, the Plaintiff seek the return of unjust enrichment on the amount equivalent to the purchase price to the Defendant on
(2) The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that B entered into a title trust agreement with the Defendant and paid the purchase price for the instant apartment.