(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.06.16 2019가단32848

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) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.06.16 2019가단32848

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around October 2018, the Defendant received investment recommendation along with a business explanation, such as guaranteeing investment principal, guaranteeing 300-40% allowances per month, and paying allowances to the Company E from C, D, etc., and began to invest money in the said Company E-Co project from around that time.

B. From that point of view, the Defendant introduced both the Plaintiff and the Appointor G, H, and the remaining Appointor through them, and recommended investment along with a business explanation to the same effect. From December 31, 2018 to January 28, 2019, the Plaintiff and the Appointor remitted a total of KRW 193,370,000, as indicated in the claim amount by the Appointor, to the Defendant to purchase the said amount.

(F) The following: (a) The money has been returned to the Plaintiff and the designated parties under the pretext of the cashization of dividends and the difference in the registered market price; (b) / [based on recognition] the fact that there is no dispute; (c) the entries (including each number) in Gap’s Evidence Nos. 2 through 16, 19, 20; and (d) the purport

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that from December 15, 2018, the Defendant had already been in the state of suspending the payment of allowances for the said Bitco project from around December 15, 2018, which was before the Plaintiff and the designated parties to provide business explanation and investment recommendation, and the said Iitco was also unable to use or industrialize the said Iitco.

The defendant knew of the above circumstances, while making a false business explanation and investment recommendation to the plaintiff and the designated parties, thereby deceiving the plaintiff and the designated parties, and he received a total of KRW 193,370,000 from the plaintiff and the designated parties as investment money.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above amount and delay damages to the plaintiff as compensation for tort.

As to this, the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2017.08.22 2016가단32828

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.12 2016가합29543

-창원지방법원 진주지원 2018.01.09 2017가단3730

-인천지방법원 2015.07.07 2014가단75225

-광주지방법원 2017.03.30 2016나8929