logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.07.17 2017가단258373
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. A around July 2, 2008, around July 2, 2008, leased from C the apartment as indicated in the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to KRW 85,00,000, and had lived together with the family at that place.

B. On October 26, 2013, the Defendant, who is an son of B, entered into a contract with C to purchase the instant apartment at KRW 147,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and received the registration of ownership transfer for the said apartment from C on November 22, 2013.

C. At the same time as the above registration of ownership transfer, the Defendant created the right to collateral security of KRW 84,000,000 with the maximum debt amount, and received a loan of KRW 70,000 from the said bank.

B Family members have been residing in the apartment of this case until now.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff has a claim for reimbursement against B as shown in the attached Table 2.

As of November 22, 2013, the registration date of ownership transfer in the Defendant’s future, KRW 1,244,244,50 as of November 22, 2013, and KRW 1,425,49,029 as of June 5, 2018, which is the date of closing the argument in the instant case. Meanwhile, Party B did not own specific real estate from around 2013 to the present date.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 (including virtual numbers) and Eul evidence Nos. 1, and the result of fact inquiry to the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City of Bupyeong-gu, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s primary assertion (i.e., purchase price of KRW 77,000,000 (=147,000,000) was actually required to purchase the apartment of this case (i.e., KRW 70,000).

However, it is clear that the Defendant was unable to prepare the above money in light of the income and age at the time of the instant sales contract, and it seems that the Defendant provided the Defendant with the purchase fund equivalent to KRW 77,00,000 to the Defendant.

If so,

arrow