logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 경주지원 2018.04.24 2017가단10582
부당이득금
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, and 5, the witness Eul's testimony and the whole purport of oral arguments:

B from May 31, 2008 to June 24, 2016, in total, 229,696,280 won tax, including earned income tax, value-added tax, and corporate tax.

B. On August 11, 2015, the Defendant received a successful bid of KRW 11,09,000 for the instant building for KRW 11,09,000 in a voluntary auction procedure concerning the building listed in the [Attachment 1] List (hereinafter “instant building”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer regarding the instant building No. 1 on September 30, 2015.

C. B was awarded a successful bid for a building listed in attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant building”) in the voluntary auction procedure on July 6, 2015, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 9, 2015.

On August 4, 2015, B completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 21, 2015 with respect to the instant building No. 2 to the Defendant.

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion B was leased to the Defendant’s name, awarded a successful bid for the instant building No. 1 with its own funds, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the Defendant, and the Plaintiff actually owned the instant building No. 2 and transferred its registration title to the Defendant.

Since the above title trust agreement is all null and void, the defendant must return unjust enrichment equivalent to the cost of acquiring the building No. 1 of this case to B, and implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the building No. 2 of this case due to the restoration of authentic title.

However, B is insolvent other than each of the instant buildings, and does not exercise its rights against the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to claim restitution of unjust enrichment equivalent to the cost of acquiring the instant building No. 1 and claim for ownership transfer registration based on the restoration of real name as to the instant building No. 2.

arrow