Does this amount to unjust enrichment? About the bank! 20

The burden of proof is on the bank.

The bank needs to issue certificates, such as transfer records, company property records, your withdrawal records, etc. Prove that you have indeed made an extra 935 to your card before you can ask for it to be returned.

After providing the above proof, you will be required to return the $935 to the bank.

Failure to do so constitutes unjust enrichment.

You can not refund until you are sure that you have received more money from the bank.

Unjust enrichment refers to the acquisition of another person's property without a lawful basis. If the bank sues you for unjust enrichment, you need to have evidence. It is indeed unjust enrichment and can be refunded.

You can check if the bank card has an extra 935 yuan.

If it is really too much, it should be returned, otherwise it is unjust enrichment.

You can ask which branch or branch of your unit's financial department is payroll. Then hit ** to contact them.

1. You can inquire about whether you have this salary in the company's finances.

2. It can be determined as unjust enrichment and should be returned.

Ask the bank to provide you with a statement and confirm with the company's finance how much you are entitled to your salary.

If it is true that more money has been paid to you, it is unjust enrichment and should be returned.

You can type ** and ask him to provide it to you, or you can take the card (passbook) and print it on the spot when you go to the bank.

Didn't you know how much money you had when you withdraw?

If you don't know, it will constitute unjust enrichment.

Just return it.

Answer]: c Unjust enrichment refers to the benefit that has no lawful basis, or has lost its lawful basis afterwards, and is recognized as a benefit obtained by causing loss to others. The unjust enrichment is not obtained as a result of the beneficiary's unlawful act against the victim; Rather, it is caused by the negligence, misunderstanding or fault of the victim or a third person.

The beneficiary of the slip is obliged to return the undue benefit to the victim after learning that his benefit has no lawful basis or that the lawful basis has been lost. Although the adopted son in item A has no legal obligation to support his biological father, according to ethical principles, it can be understood as fulfilling a moral obligation, and Chen's alimony to his biological parents is voluntary, so it is not an inadvertent misdeserved benefit; Item B gambling violates the mandatory regulations of Guoxin Xiaoduan's family, and the gambling funds should be confiscated, instead of being returned for unjust enrichment. The creditor in subparagraph d has a legal basis for accepting the repayment of the debt, and it is not considered to have a legal basis because the repayment period has not expired.

Item C is a typical example of unjust enrichment, that is, the store makes an unreasonable loss to the customer because of the customer's negligence. The answer is c.

Legal Analysis: Tangerine has the following conditions to constitute unjust enrichment:

1. One party obtains benefits.

2. The interests of other parties are damaged.

3. There is a causal relationship between the benefit obtained by one party and the loss of the interest of the other party.

4. There is no legal basis for obtaining benefits and damage to interests.

Legal basis: Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

The one hundred and twenty-second imaginary strip? Because another person has no legal basis and obtains improper benefits, the person who has suffered losses has the right to request the return of the improper benefits.

Article 985? Where the gainer obtains improper benefits without a legal basis, the person who suffers losses may request the gainers to return the benefits obtained, except in any of the following circumstances:

1) Payments made to fulfill moral obligations, (2) Settlement of debts before they become due, and (3) Settlement of debts made knowing that there is no obligation to pay.

1) Unjust enrichment arising from the invalidity or revocation of civil juristic acts.

2) Unjust enrichment arising from the performance of non-existent debts.

3) Unjust enrichment arising from the termination of the contract.

4) Unjust enrichment based on the actions of the beneficiary, victim or third party.

5) Unjust enrichment based on events.

1. Determination of unjust enrichment.

Why did the court identify the debt as unjust enrichment in this case? It turns out that the basis for determining unjust enrichment is as follows:

Unjust enrichment refers to a factual state of affairs caused by the act of causing losses to others without a legal basis, and the relationship of rights and obligations between the parties arising from unjust enrichment is the debt of unjust enrichment.

A payment that is not established due to the lack of the purpose of the payment or the reason for the payment can constitute unjust enrichment arising from the payment.

In this case, both Ms. Wang and Ms. Zhang recognized the fact of the transfer, but the purpose of the transfer was not at the time of transfer, such as the transfer was not for the purpose of paying off debts, etc.; In addition, Ms. Zhang claimed that the reason for the payment was because they had cooperative economic dealings, but through investigation, it was also confirmed that the reason for the payment was not established. Therefore, the debt between Ms. Wang and Ms. Zhang is a debt of unjust enrichment, and Ms. Zhang, the debtor of unjust enrichment, should return the debt of unjust enrichment to Ms. Wang.

Therefore, there is no IOU or IOU, only transfer vouchers, and creditors want to collect debts, so they may wish to learn from Ms. Wang.

2. What is the difference between the crime of unjust enrichment and the crime of embezzlement?

The difference between the crime of unjust enrichment and the crime of embezzlement is as follows:

1. Unjust enrichment refers to the benefits that have no legal basis, or lose their legal basis afterwards, and are recognized as benefits obtained by others due to losses, and shall bear the obligation to return; The crime of embezzlement refers to the act of illegally taking possession of forgotten or buried objects for the purpose of unlawful possession;

2. Nature: Unjust enrichment is civil liability; The crime of misappropriation is criminal liability;

3. The unjust enrichment is not due to the beneficiary's illegal acts against the victim; Rather, it is due to the negligence, misunderstanding or fault of the victim or a third person. Thus, the beneficiary and the victim form a debt relationship, with the beneficiary being the debtor and the victim being the creditor.

3. How to calculate unjust enrichment.

Unjust enrichment refers to the acquisition of benefits that are detrimental to others without a lawful basis. After the occurrence of the legal fact of unjust enrichment, a relationship of rights and obligations arises between the unjust enricher and the owner of the unjust enrichment (the victim), that is, the owner of the unjust enrichment has the right to request the unjust enricher to return the undeserved benefit, and the unjust enricher has the obligation to return it. This creates a debt-related relationship between the two parties.

Answer] :d d [Analysis] Article 171 of the "Mintong Opinions" stipulates: "If the obligor has fulfilled the limitation period and repents on the grounds that the statute of limitations has expired, it shall not be supported."

Item A may be excluded under this provision. Gambling has always been prohibited in our country, and the property obtained due to gambling is illegal gains, and the illegal gains should be roughly handed over to the state, so item B cannot be returned as unjust enrichment. In item C, if a company pays off its undue debts, the benefits obtained by the gainer are lawful gains, so they should also be excluded.

Answer] :d the meaning of the brother's enrichment is a kind of benefit obtained by oneself without a lawful basis, causing others to suffer losses, and the actor of unjust enrichment is subjectively without malice. Since there is no legal basis for unjust enrichment, this fait accompli is not protected by law, and a creditor-debtor relationship is formed between the parties, and the creditor has the right to request the debtor to return the interest.

The constitutive elements of unjust enrichment include four aspects: (1) one party obtains benefits; (2) the other party suffers damage; (3) there is a causal relationship between the benefit and the loss; (4) There is no legal basis for benefiting. Unjust enrichment belongs to the civil category, and the methods of handling it are:

1) Return of the original, that is, the original should be returned when the original is still alive; (2) Return as a price, that is, if the original item no longer exists, it can be repaid at a price. Therefore, when selling hungry goods, overcharging, finding more money for goods, and finding lost property for oneself are all unjust enrichment. Select D for this question.

Item A: The property obtained by Wang Gang as a result of gambling is not unjust enrichment, and the perpetrator subjectively has a strong motive to take possession of other people's property, and the act is illegal possession. The law does not protect the property losses suffered as a result of engaging in illegal acts, and the party who has obtained the property has no legal remedy.

Item B: Unjust enrichment must be passive, and unjust enrichment under civil law must not be based on the premise of illegality, and if it is theft, it is illegal. Xu Ting's withdrawal of money (excluding the first withdrawal) did not constitute Kaipei's return of unjust enrichment, because of his initiative to "enrich", his behavior exceeded the scope of consideration of "unjust enrichment" and "embezzlement", and the number of erroneous withdrawals that intentionally used ATMs to make profits was 170 times, and the amount involved was huge, making his behavior highly aggressive although it was in a legal form, and as a result, his behavior had the need to be included in the scope of adjustment of the criminal law.

Item C: No matter what the purpose is, Zhang Li's stealing of her mother's money has constituted an illegal act and does not belong to unjust enrichment. In law, the act of stealing one's own family or relatives' finances is illegal, but the law is different from ordinary cases.

The following constitutes unjust enrichment:1The purpose of the payment is lacking from the beginning.

It refers to the fact that there is no reason for payment at the time of payment, which is typical of non-debt repayment and the reason for payment is not established, invalid or revoked. 2.The purpose of payment subsequently does not exist.

It refers to the fact that although there was a legal reason at the time of payment, but the reason did not exist later, and unjust enrichment occurred due to the payment of one party. 3.The purpose of the payment is not achieved.

If the purpose of the payment cannot be achieved in accordance with the intent of the payment due to various obstacles, the receipt of the benefit lacks the legitimacy to retain the benefit of the payment, and thus constitutes unjust enrichment.

1. How to deal with refusal to return unjust enrichment property.

If you refuse to return unjust enrichment property, you may file a lawsuit in court. Article 985 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the gainer obtains an improper benefit without a legal basis, the injured person may request the gainer to return the gainer, except in any of the following circumstances: (1) payment for the performance of a moral obligation; (2) the repayment of debts before they become due; (3) Paying off debts knowing that there is no obligation to pay the town.

Article 986 stipulates that if the gainer does not know and should not know that the benefit obtained has no legal basis, and the benefit obtained no longer exists, he shall not bear the obligation to return the benefit. Article 987 stipulates that if the gainer knows or should know that the benefits obtained have no legal basis, the person who suffers losses may request the gainers to return the benefits he has obtained and compensate for the losses in accordance with law.

2. What is the difference between an ancillary obligation and a dependent obligation?

From the difference between obligations and ancillary obligations:

1) The obligation to pay can be independently claimed, while the ancillary obligation cannot be independently claimed.

2) the obligation to pay from is a typical contractual obligation; The ancillary obligation is essentially the obligation to protect the interests of the parties by means of infringement, forming a state of competition between legal infringement and breach of contract. For example, the liability for product quality arises on the basis of ancillary obligations, and the scope of protection includes the person and property of the creditor.

3) The subordinate obligation is intended to satisfy the main payment obligation, while the value of the ancillary obligation lies in maximizing the benefits of the contract.

Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Article 122:Where others obtain improper benefits because they have no legal basis, the person who has suffered losses has the right to request that they return the improper benefits.