logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.11.15 2016가단257002
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2016, the Plaintiff and C entered into a business agreement with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation and the Incheon Urban Corporation ordering, supply and demand the new management office construction among the “D Development Project Landscape Corporation” (hereinafter “instant construction”) in the name of the Defendant, which is in charge of joint supply of and demand for the Korean Peninsula Construction Co., Ltd. and the Korea Peninsula Construction Co., Ltd., under the name of the Defendant. However, the Plaintiff and C paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant with the title trust fee and jointly divided the remaining profits.

B. From April 1, 2016 to May 4, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 26,617,000 (hereinafter “the instant money”) in the account under the name of the Defendant’s representative director, at the request of C, five times from April 1, 2016 to May 4, 2016. The Defendant paid the money deposited by the Plaintiff as labor expenses and temporary materials for the instant construction site.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 4 through 5, Eul witness's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff should pay the above amount to the plaintiff, considering the plaintiff's primary argument that the amount of this case was lent to the defendant.

However, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant borrowed the instant money from the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s primary assertion is without merit.

B. (1) The plaintiff asserts that the amount should be returned as unjust enrichment since the defendant acquired the amount in this case by way of a construction license lending prohibited under the Construction Business Act.

However, the above facts and the testimony of the witness C are as follows: ① The Plaintiff and C are material and labor costs to carry out the instant construction before advance payment is made from the original office to the actual contractor of the instant construction.

arrow