logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.01.19 2016나1561
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6, Eul evidence Nos. 7 and 8.

Plaintiff

On June 19, 2008, with respect to mobile phones (B; hereinafter referred to as “instant mobile phones”), a contract for subscription to mobile communications services and a contract for mobile device installment sales (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”) provided by the Defendant was concluded.

B. On August 31, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for subscription to mobile communications services and for installment sales of devices provided by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”) with respect to the instant mobile phone via online (hereinafter “instant contract”). As above, the Defendant was undergoing the procedure for verifying the contractor’s identity by means of the mobile phone identification method via the instant mobile phone at the time of entering into the instant contract.

C. On April 30, 2013, the Plaintiff’s name entered into a mobile service subscription contract and a mobile device installment sales contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) provided by the Defendant with respect to the instant mobile phone via online (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the Defendant entered into the instant contract (i.e., each of the instant contracts, including ①, ②, and ③ collectively referred to as “each of the instant contracts”). As seen above, at the time the instant contract was entered into, the Defendant was undergoing the procedure for verifying the contractor’s identity by means of the mobile phone identification method via the instant mobile phone.

As stipulated in each of the instant contracts, 3,880,038 won was automatically transferred from June 2008 to March 2015 to the Defendant’s virtual account, from June 2008 to March 2015.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff died on March 3, 2015, and on May 5, 2015, “C” opened and used the instant mobile phone by stealing the name of the Plaintiff. The instant mobile phone charges and the instant mobile phone charges.

arrow