(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.02.17 2014가단32981

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.02.17 2014가단32981

부당이득금

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 30,00,000, and the Plaintiff’s annual interest from October 16, 2008 to August 8, 2014; and (b) August 9, 2014.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who carries out the Communications Corporation under the trade name of “C”.

The plaintiff became aware of the defendant through the introduction of D.

B. The Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant the total sum of KRW 30 million on October 15, 2008, KRW 10 million, and KRW 20 million on October 16, 2008.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the facts that the defendant, around October 15, 2008, told the plaintiff that he would be entitled to receive an electrical construction of KRW 1.3 billion in relation to the construction of an apartment building around the Daegu-gu Daegu ICT that started around November 2008, the plaintiff paid the defendant a total of KRW 30 million as the basic facts to the defendant, and the above construction has not been carried out up until now, and the defendant introduced the plaintiff to E who assumes the head of EP construction headquarters, and the defendant did not intend to receive a subcontract for construction of reinforced concrete and telecommunications construction among the new apartment construction works and received a fund, and received the above money within one month, even if he did not want or ability to receive a subcontract for construction of the apartment construction among the new apartment construction works, the fact that the defendant acquired the above money by deception was prosecuted for the charge of fraud (Seoul District Court Decision 2015No48484).

In light of the above facts, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the above KRW 30 million and delay damages incurred to the plaintiff, except in special circumstances. The defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the above KRW 30 million and delay damages.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant is actually the plaintiff on October 13, 2008.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.04.07 2015고단484

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2016.07.15 2016고단4

-서울서부지방법원 2012.11.14 2012고단838

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.03 2014가합594531

-광주지방법원 2015.05.21 2013가단74085