(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.08.22 2018가단211

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) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.08.22 2018가단211

대여금

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserts that a total of KRW 173,800,000 was lent to the Defendant over 23 times from November 15, 2012 to December 8, 2014, and thus, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s primary claim solely based on the results of the order to submit financial transaction information to the NHF Bank to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The Plaintiff’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

2. The fact that the Plaintiff transferred a total of KRW 173,80,000 on 23 occasions from November 15, 2012 to December 8, 2014, to the account held in the name of the Defendant, does not conflict between the parties.

The plaintiff asserts that the defendant obtained monetary benefits, such as acquiring a hospital building by using the above money transferred without any legal ground, and that the plaintiff has a duty to return it in unjust enrichment.

The burden of proving that there is no legal ground in the case of the so-called unjust enrichment that one party claims the return of the benefits after having paid a certain amount of benefits according to his/her own will on the grounds that there is no legal ground.

In such cases, a person who seeks the return of unjust enrichment shall assert and prove, together with the existence of the fact causing the act of payment, that the cause has ceased to exist due to the extinguishment of the said cause due to invalidation, cancellation, cancellation, etc., and that in the same case as the so-called mistake remittance made on the ground that there was no ground that the act of payment was caused, he/she shall assert and prove the fact that

(Supreme Court Decision 2017Da37324 Decided January 24, 2018). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, in this case where the Plaintiff transferred the above money to the Defendant at his/her own will, the statement of evidence Nos. 4 through 6 and the NH Bank of this Court against the Plaintiff.

참조판례

-대법원 2018. 1. 24. 선고 2017다37324 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.21 2019나18050

-대구지방법원김천지원 2020.12.23 2020가단32820

-창원지방법원 2021.02.18 2020가단117551

-전주지방법원 2020.10.14 2019나2646

-울산지방법원 2020.10.29 2019나14301