beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
2...
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 4 to 6, Eul evidence No. 7-1 to 3, and Eul evidence No. 9:
A established a medical corporation D (hereinafter referred to as “D”) on October 22, 2012, and established a medical corporation D (hereinafter referred to as “D”), and took office as a director with the power of representation, and operated the E Hospital established by D, and the Defendant was appointed as D director on October 22, 2012 as his/her father and wife.
B. The Plaintiff, as a drug wholesaler and retail company, supplied various drugs to the E Hospital.
C. D was decided to commence the rehabilitation procedure on September 6, 2013, Seoul Central District Court 2013 Gohap147, while operating the E Hospital.
On December 23, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 30,000,000 in total, including KRW 10,000,000,000 on deposit account in the name of the Defendant and KRW 20,000 on December 26, 2013 (hereinafter “instant money”).
E. On December 26, 2013, A issued and delivered a loan certificate to the Plaintiff that A borrowed KRW 30,000,000 from the Plaintiff on a monthly basis and June 30, 2014, respectively.
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although there is no legal relationship to remit the instant money to the Defendant, the Plaintiff wired the instant money to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant, by the number of the employees in charge of the Plaintiff’s account. Accordingly, the Defendant gains profit equivalent to the instant money without any legal ground, and thereby, incurred damages to the Plaintiff equivalent to the same amount. As such, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the instant money, namely, KRW 30,000,000, and damages for delay, due to the return of unjust enrichment. (ii) or according to the deposit transaction basic terms and conditions, when the remitter transfers the money to the Plaintiff’s deposit account, and the remitter recorded the money in the deposit ledger, barring special circumstances.