logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2015.12.01 2015가단11520
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On January 31, 2015, the person who was unaware of basic facts discovered credit information, such as the Plaintiff’s bank account number (F), resident number, authorized certificate, security card number, etc., and transferred KRW 22,92,99 in total from the account in the name of the Defendants to the pertinent account in the name of the Defendants.

The Plaintiff received a total of KRW 2,031,198 as stated in the attached Table “amount refunded” column from among the balance remaining in the Defendants’ account through the Financial Supervisory Service.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion was unjust enrichment by transferring each of the money indicated in the “amount of actual damage” column in the attached Table from the Plaintiff’s account to each of their respective accounts in their names without any legal grounds, and thus, the Defendants are obligated to return the amount to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. In the event that an addressee acquires a deposit claim equivalent to the amount of account transfer by account transfer even though there is no legal relationship between the remitter and the addressee, the remitter may 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). The unjust enrichment system imposes a duty to return on the benefiting person based on the principle of fair justice in a case where the benefiting person’s property benefits do not have a legal ground. Thus, if the benefiting person has no substantial benefit, the benefiting person cannot be held liable to return the benefiting person’s personal information, and therefore, the benefiting person, using the Plaintiff’s personal information, remitted money from the Plaintiff’s account under the name of the Defendants to the

Even if the Defendants gain profit equivalent to the aforementioned remitted money, the Defendants can actually control it.

arrow