Seoul Central District Court-2018-Ga-5080267 ( September 19, 2018)

Although the representative of the company paid the final tax according to the dividend details stated in the books, it is not unjust enrichment even if the subsequent fact was found to have been false.

Even though a false statement in the company's account book was made after the relevant criminal judgment, since the defect was not clearly revealed at the time of the disposition of final appeal by the original defendant, it cannot be viewed as unjust enrichment because the disposition does not fall under the invalidation of the disposition.

Article 741 (Unjustifiable Profit under Civil Act)

2018Na65035 Undue gains

AA

Korea

June 26, 2019

July 17, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 51,99,120 won with 5% interest per annum from June 10, 2016 to the service date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's ruling was 'the second and sixth acts in the court of first instance' and 'the amount of money was received from the company every year.' The reason for this court' is the same as that of the court of first instance, so it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.