logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.02.13 2017나56554
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. On the basis of the conjunctive claim added at the trial, the defendant 15,000.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 11, 2016, the Plaintiff, a person operating a construction machinery sales business under the name of “E”, was aware that he/she sold and purchased a vehicle with heavy weighted from a person with no personal knowledge, and was aware on March 14, 2016, to purchase the vehicle referred to as “child of a person with no personal knowledge” and to purchase KRW 140 million after confirming his/her registration certificate, and deposited KRW 50 million, which was part of the purchase price, with an account in the name of the Defendant under the name of the non-person with no personal knowledge (hereinafter “instant account”).

B. However, in fact F was aware that the Plaintiff was guilty of fraud from a person who was unaware of his name.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant was engaged in the exchange of travel agents and exchange in the Philippines Mar. 14, 2016, which received a request from D to “I wish to conduct business in the Philippines. It is necessary to deposit KRW 50 million in the name of the Plaintiff.”

Accordingly, the Defendant confirmed personal information with D’s passport and transferred KRW 50 million to the account of this case, and paid KRW 400,000 to D corresponding thereto.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 6, 10, 11 (which includes a dive number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In the principal of the Plaintiff’s assertion, KRW 50 million, which the Plaintiff deposited to the Defendant, was acquired without any legal cause and constitutes unjust enrichment, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return it to the Plaintiff.

Preliminaryly, the defendant aided and abetting D's illegal acts without the plaintiff's consent and exchanged them to D, thereby causing damages equivalent to KRW 50 million to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff KRW 50 million as compensation for damages caused by the illegal acts.

B. The defendant's assertion is exchanged from D.

arrow