logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.07.19 2017나60571
부당이득(횡령)금 반환
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Following the 4th 11th th th th th th th th th th th 1 of the first th th th th th th 14,33,922 of the total revenue in 2005, the total revenue in 2,83,600, the total revenue in 2006, the total revenue in 26,985,202, the total revenue in 10,988,483,922 won as of the end of 2006 - 2,83,603,600 - 2,83,600, 207, 307, 207, 307, 407, 307, 407, 207, 307, 407, 207, 307, 307, 407, 207, 307, 2007, 3007.

The fourth part of the judgment of the court of first instance (C. Fire Door 5,900,00 won for the construction cost of KRW 5,90,000) is as follows.

As seen earlier, the fact that the Defendant spent KRW 5,900,000 on the Plaintiff’s account book for construction cost of KRW 5,90,000 on May 29, 2007 that the Defendant spent KRW 5,90,000 on the Plaintiff’s account book for construction cost of KRW 5,00,000 is the Plaintiff. The fact that KRW 1,50,000 out of the above money was actually spent on the construction cost of a door is the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant’s remaining KRW 4,40,000 ( KRW 5,90,000 - KRW 1,50,000) was arbitrarily consumed on the Plaintiff’s account book for construction cost of KRW 16 alone.

arrow