logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.12 2016나23105
부당이득금반환
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 fact that the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 36,00,000 from the Defendant’s deposit account on August 19, 2010, KRW 9,000,000 on August 20, 2010, KRW 36,000 on September 15, 2010, and KRW 36,00,000 on September 15, 2010 to the Defendant’s deposit account may be acknowledged by taking into account the entries in the evidence No. 1 and the entire purport of pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff visited the real estate consulting office operated by C, the Defendant’s mother, while studying the commercial building to rent for the clothing sale business. During the process of counseling the lease relationship, the Plaintiff told C to the circumstances in which the auction is underway on the Plaintiff’s building due to his/her debt.

As such, C, while her relatives desire to resolve the problem of attorney-at-law office affairs, C, while remitting 36,00,000 won to the defendant's deposit account that C, the plaintiff remitted 36,000,000 won to the defendant's deposit account that C said.

However, C did not use the money for the plaintiff, and eventually, the building owned by the plaintiff was sold in the auction procedure, and the plaintiff filed a complaint against C with the intention of fraud, and as a result C was punished for 6 months by imprisonment with prison labor for fraud.

Therefore, since the money remitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is given without any legal ground, the Defendant, the holder of the bank account, is obligated to pay KRW 36,00,000 to the Plaintiff as the return of unjust enrichment.

B. According to the reasoning of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 of the judgment, C made a false statement to the Plaintiff on August 2010, 201 that “C may prevent the Plaintiff from selling real estate located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul, which is owned by the Plaintiff on the face of KRW 36,00,000.” At the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 36,00,000 to the Defendant’s deposit account; C used the Defendant’s passbook, etc. in advance, and C consumed all of the money transferred from the Plaintiff regardless of the Defendant; C used the Defendant’s passbook, etc. to withdraw or transfer money transferred to the Plaintiff; and C used from the Plaintiff on April 30, 2014 to the Plaintiff on April 36, 200.

arrow