(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.10.15 2020나304503

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.10.15 2020나304503

보험계약무효확인등

Text

1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. The Defendant’s KRW 98,380,000 and its amount on August 2018.

Reasons

1. Grounds for the court’s explanation of the cited case

2.(b)

This part of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the modification of the following, and thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. A part used for replacement;

B. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the contract in this case is null and void, and the Defendant asserts that the sum of KRW 98,380,000,000 paid to the Plaintiff is obligated to return the said insurance proceeds in unjust enrichment. Accordingly, the Defendant is not obligated to return the said insurance proceeds, as his father D received and consumed the said insurance proceeds. 2) In the event that a deposit contract is concluded through a real name verification procedure under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality and the fact of real name verification is clearly indicated in the form of a deposit contract, etc. in accordance with the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality, the deposit title holder shall be deemed to be the party to the deposit contract, i.e., the deposit right holder, unless it is extremely exceptional under the agreement between the financial institution and the contributor, to exclude

In addition, in a case where a remitter enters into a deposit account in accordance with the basic terms and conditions of deposit transactions and enters into a deposit account in the ledger of a deposit, barring any special circumstance, deposit contract between the remitter and the recipient bank is established, regardless of whether there is a legal relationship between the remitter and the recipient, which is the cause of the deposit, and the payee shall acquire a deposit claim equivalent to the above deposit amount from the receiving bank.

In addition, there is no legal relationship that causes the account transfer between the remitter and the payee.

참조조문

-금융실명거래 및 비밀보장에 관한 법률

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2018.05.01 2016나52832

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.06 2014나62335

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.09.28 2016가단70556

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.20 2015나66792

-대구지방법원영덕지원 2015.01.13 2014가단1855