beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 11, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 35,600,000 to the bank account (Account Number C) in the name of the Defendant on January 11, 2016, upon receipt of a request for purchase of BMW 528i vehicle from a person who works as a business employee assisting in the sale and purchase of used cars.
B. The above KRW 35,600,000 deposited in the account in the bank account in the name of the defendant was fully withdrawn in cash with the name of the defendant.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, the purport of whole pleadings
2. Judgment as to the main claim
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion made an error due to the crime of Bophishing in this case by the person without the name of the plaintiff and transferred 35,600,000 won to the defendant's account. Accordingly, the defendant obtained the above 35,60,000 won without any legal ground and thereby suffered a loss equivalent to the above amount to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the amount of 35,60,000 won which is equivalent to the account transfer amount to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment. 2) Since the plaintiff's assertion withdrawal of the money transferred to the defendant's account by the person without the name of the defendant, the defendant did not have made any unjust enrichment.
B. 1) Even if there is no legal relationship between the client for transfer of accounts and the addressee, in cases where the addressee acquires a deposit claim equivalent to the amount of account transfer by account transfer, the remitter shall be entitled to claim the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the above amount against the addressee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da51239, Nov. 29, 2007). Meanwhile, the unjust enrichment system imposes the duty to return on the benefiting party based on the principle of fair justice in cases where the benefiting party’s property gains do not have a legal ground, and it does not belong to the benefiting party.