logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.11.27 2014가합8391
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) D made a false statement to the Plaintiff that “I would pay the principal and make profits through the resale of the right to sell an apartment, if I lend money to B, I would also pay the principal and make profits through the resale of the right to sell the apartment.” While the Plaintiff borrowed money to D, it incurred damages equivalent to KRW 960,000,000 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to receive proper return. 2) D concealed the money acquired through the above money into the Defendant’s account that was the husband. Since the Defendant obtained profits without any legal cause while keeping or using the money in the account under the name of the Defendant, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the return of unjust enrichment of KRW 200,000,000, which is part of the above damages.

B. The defendant's assertion that D, the former wife of the defendant, borrowed money from the defendant and D, and repaid it by borrowing money from the defendant and D, but the defendant does not conceal the above deceptive money or made unjust enrichment.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 3-1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 4-1, and Eul evidence No. 5-10 of the evidence No. 5-10 of the judgment, D falsely states that "When you have leased money to the plaintiff, they will pay the principal and make profits through the resale of the purchase of the purchase of the apartment house, if you have leased money to the plaintiff, you will also pay the principal and make profits." D received money from the plaintiff from November 2008 to April 2010, and paid the plaintiff KRW 960,000 in relation to the above illegal act. D is recognized as having agreed with the plaintiff to pay the plaintiff KRW 960,000 in total,00 in relation to the above illegal act. D is recognized as having been married on Dec. 10, 1996 and divorced on Feb. 25, 2014.

However, the evidence Nos. 4-2, 3, 9-1 to 4, 12-2.

arrow