logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.18 2019가단5197827
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had worked in the Plaintiff Company was paid KRW 77,962,710 in total as wages, retirement allowances, and bonus from February 2, 201 to September 201 without having worked in the Plaintiff Company.

The defendant is obligated to return the money from the plaintiff company as unjust enrichment because he received the money from the plaintiff company without any legal ground and suffered a loss equivalent to the same amount.

B. The burden of proving the fact that the general establishment requirement of unjust enrichment was made without any legal ground in a lawsuit claiming restitution of unjust enrichment is borne by the requester of return.

Therefore, in order to recognize that the defendant obtained unjust benefits equivalent to the withdrawn amount of this case as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant must be proved to have acquired the above amount at will without any legal ground.

Plaintiff

The company was jointly established by C and D, the representative director of C as of February 201, and the defendant received the total of KRW 77,962,710 from the plaintiff company from February 2, 2011 to September 201, there is no dispute between the parties.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the evidence Nos. 4, 12, and 14 as a whole, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant acquired profits equivalent to the wages without any legal cause even if he/she actually did not work for the Plaintiff company, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① At the time of visiting the Plaintiff Company in around 2013, the witness E testified that C was to deliver the Defendant’s salary ledger for the year 2011 to the Defendant, and that C was to have attempted to talk with the Defendant whenever the Defendant was to visit the factory, but the Defendant was not able to deliver it.

arrow