(영문) 대전지방법원서산지원 2015.04.29 2014가단1982

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) 대전지방법원서산지원 2015.04.29 2014가단1982

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On October 22, 2003, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent 12 million won to the Defendant.

The defendant repaid to the plaintiff the total amount of KRW 2 million on May 24, 2005, KRW 1 million on June 2, 2005, KRW 4 million on June 9, 2005, and KRW 8 million on June 9, 2005. The remainder of KRW 8 million was repaid by subrogation through C, etc. until 2006.

The Defendant asserted that 4 million won paid to the Plaintiff as the repayment of the loan was leased to the Plaintiff, and received an order to pay 2013 tea20 from the Seo-gun District Court of Seosan Branch of Daejeon District Court. On the basis of the above enforcement title, the Defendant filed a request for auction on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff, and received dividends of KRW 51,671,154 on July 9, 2014.

Therefore, since the defendant made unjust enrichment, it is necessary to return the dividend received to the plaintiff.

2. The key issue of the instant case is whether the Defendant lent 4 million won to the Plaintiff (2 million won on May 24, 2005, 10 million won on June 2, 2005, and 1 million won on June 9, 2005) or borrowed money from the Plaintiff.

Since this case has the nature of objection to claim, there is the burden of proof on the plaintiff who asserts the return of unjust enrichment.

First of all, evidence conforming to the plaintiff's assertion has evidence Nos. 5 to 13 and witness C and D respectively.

On the other hand, on the one hand, the following circumstances are also acknowledged according to the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the results of the inquiry of Sugsan and the purport of the whole pleadings.

- The check amounting to KRW 12 million, which the Plaintiff asserted that he was the Defendant, is confirmed to have been endorsed and distributed by D (the result of the fact-finding inquiry) - around October 22, 2003, in which the Plaintiff asserted that he lent money to the Defendant, there was a deposit balance of at least seven million won in the Defendant’s account (Evidence 1) - the statement of remittance as “Design CostB” (No. 24, 2005), “B court expense” (B court expense), and “B court expense” (No. 9, 2005) while remitting money to the Plaintiff.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.04.27 2015가단23683

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2014.02.12 2011고단1248

-서울북부지방법원 2017.12.12 2017가단16874

-의정부지방법원 2009.10.09 2009가단21157

-대구지방법원서부지원 2015.07.24 2015가합787