logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2019.05.29 2018가단7582
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff B is the Defendant’s mother, and the Plaintiff C is the father-son’s mother, who is married with Plaintiff B’s net E (hereinafter “the deceased”).

B. On August 29, 2018, the Deceased died during the instant lawsuit, and the Plaintiffs inherited the deceased’s property.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. From around 1989, the Plaintiffs asserted that they had operated the packaging horse of the trade name “G” in Suwon-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant packaging horse”). From around 2010, the Defendant assisted and operated the deceased due to the aggravation of the health of the deceased.

In addition, when the instant packing lot was expropriated as an apartment project and the compensation amount of KRW 50 million was to be paid, the Defendant received compensation amount of KRW 50 million in total, including the amount of KRW 25 million for the removal contract around April 11, 2017, around January 31, 2018, and the remainder of KRW 25 million from H around January 31, 2018.

In addition, the Defendant agreed to give the Deceased a compensation of KRW 50 million on January 2, 2018, but did not implement the agreement.

As above, the Defendant is merely assisting the operation of the packing machine of this case, and there is no legitimate authority to receive compensation. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to return the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment of KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff B and KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff C according to the inheritance share.

B. According to the overall purport of evidence No. 1-2, No. 1-2, No. 2, and No. 5-2, and No. 5, the deceased’s embezzlement against the Defendant by asserting that “the Defendant provided assistance to the operation of the package of this case, even though the Defendant received compensation for the death of the deceased and embezzled at will.”

arrow