Episode 67

Article 249 of the Civil Act (Acquisition in Good Faith): If a person who has peacefully and publicly acquired possession of a movable property is in good faith and possesses the property without negligence, they shall immediately acquire ownership of the movable property even if the transferor is not the rightful owner.

Let's imagine that I go to a store and buy a frying pan.

But it turns out that the store owner didn't actually own the frying pan; they just sold me something that someone from the store next door had left with them for safekeeping.

From the perspective of the person from the next-door store, they'd be furious.

Why would someone sell off something that wasn't even theirs?

If it was a frying pan meant for sale in the first place, it wouldn't be so bad.

They could just think that they had saved some trouble since it was going to be sold anyway, and recover the money for the frying pan from the store owner.

But what if it wasn't something that they had planned on selling?

What if it was a limited edition, discontinued frying pan, of which there were only 100 in the world?

Or what if it was the only memento that the person from the next-door store's deceased mother had left behind, a precious item that they could never lose?

In such cases, the question of who should be considered the owner of the frying pan can become an issue.

Is it the customer who rightfully paid for the item, or is it the person from the next-door store who was the true owner of the frying pan from the beginning?

It's a bad situation for the person from the next-door store, but the current Civil Act sides with the customer.

"Well, if we were to side with the original owner, then from the consumer's perspective, every time they buy something, they would have to check, 'Is this really yours?'"

That would be a very annoying and cumbersome task.

It's not even realistically possible.

Real estate, such as buildings or land, allows for the easy tracking of the real owner through registration. But in the case of general goods, i.e., movable property, there's no way for a customer to know who the real owner is.

In that situation, if we were to corner the customer with, "You should have checked properly," and take the item away from them to return it to the owner, it would cause a huge amount of distrust and confusion.

In the end, the system created to respect the consumer's trust is the acquisition in good faith.

• Th, that doesn't make sense!

"I'm just telling you that that's how the current law is. Regarding movable property, that is..."

• Okay, that! Property!

Yoon Soo-ah shouted back.

• Are you saying that our Somi is property now?

"Legally, yes. Article 98 of the Civil Act defines property as 'tangible objects and electricity or other controllable natural forces,' and precedents consider animals to be included in this."

This is because even a living being that can feel emotions, an animal, can legally become someone's 'property' and be the subject of a transaction.

In the end, Somi is property, and as property, the person who adopted her without knowing the circumstances with A acquires ownership of Somi in good faith.

• That's absurd.

Yoon Soo-ah was indignant.

• What kind of law is that? Does that mean that if someone steals my stuff and sells it, I can never get it back?

"Ah, no, that's not the case."

I added.

"There's also a special rule regarding stolen goods and lost items."

Article 250 (Special Rules on Stolen Goods and Lost Items) In the case of the preceding Article, if the movable property is a stolen or lost item, the victim or the person who lost the item may claim the return of the item within two years from the date of the theft or loss. However, this shall not apply to stolen or lost money.

The reason for acknowledging acquisition in good faith is that the legislator has determined that, when comparing the consumer's trust and the value of the rightful owner's rights, the former should be protected more.

Underlying that is the criticism that the original owner is also somewhat responsible for the situation, in the sense of 'you should have taken better care of it.'

But in cases of theft or accidental loss, there's no room for blaming anyone.

It's also not fair to completely ignore an owner who lost their item unwillingly.

That's why there's an exception that allows the return of stolen items.

• Th, then, that!

Yoon Soo-ah shouted urgently.

• If someone who was just keeping the item for a while sells it off on their own, isn't that no different from theft? Can't I get it back with this?

'Not a bad idea.'

In fact, if a person who was keeping an item disposes of it on their own, it might not constitute theft, but it could be considered 'embezzlement,' which is also a property crime.

And any item acquired through a property crime is treated as stolen goods under criminal law.

Since it's stolen goods, it's a stolen item, and since it's a stolen item, the special rule for return should apply—that was a logical argument.

"It doesn't work."

But I denied it.

"A possessory assistant... that is, if someone who was keeping the item disposes of it, it's not considered stolen goods under civil law."

It's an extension of the criticism, 'you should have taken better care of it.' It's the logic that since you trusted and entrusted it to that person, you should have chosen the person to entrust it to more carefully.

The owner has the 'fault' of not choosing the person to entrust it to properly, but the customer, who bought it without knowing anything, has no fault.

When balancing these two, the law sides with the customer.

• Wha, what kind of nonsense is that...

Yoon Soo-ah gritted her teeth.

• Is that all you can do? Is that really the best you can do?

'Yeah. That's the best I can do.'

In fact, if I was willing to use any means necessary to get Somi back, it wasn't as if there were no paths to try.

For acquisition in good faith to be established, the customer must have bought the item without knowing anything.

Of course, Seo Hwi-sung had confirmed that he didn't know that Somi wasn't A's cat when he bought her, but a fight in court is ultimately a fight between claims and evidence.

If I could somehow persuade A to give a testimony that was favorable to us, that would be enough.

We could also argue that the transaction itself was invalid or should be canceled.

Especially in this case, A had decided to sell the cat emotionally while drunk.

At that time, A was intoxicated and not in her right mind, and she didn't have the capacity to make a valid transaction, so the argument could be made that it was invalid.

'But either way, it requires A's cooperation.'

Humans are easily creatures of habit.

A had lived as Yoon Soo-ah's maid for a long time.

If I could coax and appease her a little, it wouldn't be impossible to return her to her original position.

Eight years is a long time.

During that time, A's weak soul had already been warped and twisted to fit the wrong power dynamic.

To shake that up a little and take control of it wouldn't be difficult for Yoon Soo-ah, who had been wielding power over her.

But... that's not a beautiful ending.

The problem between A and Yoon Soo-ah wouldn't be resolved at all.

Just like before, Yoon Soo-ah would use A, and A wouldn't be able to resist Yoon Soo-ah and would be swayed once again.

Somi would also lose her proper guardian and return to Yoon Soo-ah's terrible care.

Nothing would change.

No one would take responsibility.

An excellent lawyer considers efficient work processing as a virtue.

For such a person, it might be the optimal solution to resolve the conflict without unnecessary procedures.

But my goal isn't to be an excellent lawyer.

It's to be someone who makes the world a little better. That's why I have dreamed of becoming a prosecutor.

If all I had to do was draw up a plan according to the client's wishes, I wouldn't have bothered studying law.

"Yoon Soo-ah."

• Wh, what is it?

My voice had become low and calm, and Yoon Soo-ah's voice trembled slightly.

"What is it that you really want, Yoon Soo-ah?"

• ......Huh?

"Somi, you don't really love her that much, do you?"

The state of the cat, which hadn't been properly cared for.

It was a sight that any animal lover would have loudly condemned as abuse.

"You're worried that you'll have to give up the YouTube channel you've put so much effort into, that you need the cat to protect that income and fame, isn't that right?"

• Wh, what are you trying to say?

"If."

I had to confirm.

"If there was a way for you to receive all the income you could have earned from YouTube, or even more, plus the value of Somi, would you be willing to give up Somi?"

I took a breath, and then asked.

"Could you give up Somi?"

• Wh, what are you saying...?

Maybe I had misjudged.

Yoon Soo-ah might not have been a good person, but perhaps her feelings for her cat were genuine.

Maybe she just didn't know how to raise her properly and was just an awkward guardian.

If that was the case, then Yoon Soo-ah would feel incredibly insulted by this question.

She might get angry at the rude counselor.

If that was the case, I would apologize sincerely and try to move forward in a different direction, even now.

I had also thought of a contingency plan for such a case.

'But.'

• ......What kind of way is that?

Unfortunately, instead of criticizing my rudeness, Yoon Soo-ah responded with a question.

It was practically an admission of everything I had just said.

'If that's the case, then I don't need to hold back.'

This was where the important part began. I had to make maximum use of Yoon Soo-ah's materialistic side.

I lowered my voice, whispering as if I was sharing a secret that no one else should hear.

"File a civil lawsuit against Cha Ye-sol."

Like a serpent pointing to the forbidden fruit, I spoke cunningly.

"The basis is a claim for damages due to illegal acts under Article 750 of the Civil Act, and a claim for unjust enrichment under Article 741."

• Huh?

"Disposing of a cat that wasn't hers is a clear illegal act. The scope of damages is everything that is recognized as having a causal relationship with the illegal act. In this case... it can include the loss of income from not being able to do YouTube because Somi is gone, and the mental damages from losing a pet."

• Oh, oh...

"It'll be a considerable amount. While there's still the issue of proof, it's possible to receive all the future income that you could have earned at once. And the money that you received from selling the cat can be returned under the name of unjust enrichment."

It was a seemingly plausible argument.

In fact, I hadn't lied about anything.

The method of calculating the scope of damages was as I had stated.

In particular, precedents have clearly stated that in cases where an item that is the main means of business is lost, compensation must be paid for the loss of business profits.

What is the main means of business for a pet YouTuber? It's the pet itself.

If Somi was lost due to Cha Ye-sol's actions, then naturally, the damages caused by that would include 'the income that could have been earned through YouTube in the future.'

• Oh, ah, oh...?

Yoon Soo-ah also seemed quite tempted.

But there was one thing that she didn't know.

[Diagnosis]

In my hand, and already sent to Cha Ye-sol, was the diagnosis from the animal hospital.

Needless to say, it was the same diagnosis that Seo Hwi-sung had gotten from the hospital.

It clearly stated the vet's opinion that Somi's life expectancy was less than a month at the time of the examination.

'Future income? That's a joke.'

How much business profit could you earn with a cat that wouldn't even live for a month?

According to my research, Yoon Soo-ah uploaded videos to her channel at most four or five times a month.

That money, and the money earned from the views that accumulated on her old videos, was all there was.

Algorithms are cold.

If Somi died and she couldn't upload any more videos, her channel would quickly be forgotten.

The exposure of her old videos would also decrease, and the influx would dry up.

In the end, no matter how you calculated it, the income that could be expected in the future was practically nothing.

"It'll definitely be an 'unimaginable' amount."

With that one additional comment, Yoon Soo-ah, who had been completely persuaded, shouted.

• I'll do it. That's a great idea!

'You fool.'

With this, the problem between the two had been moved to a battle in court.

A battlefield where there was no turning back once you had stepped foot inside.

I recalled Cha Ye-sol's words.

'I said that I wanted to fight properly, even just once.'

That would surely happen.

In her hands, she had the weapon that I had given her, and if she didn't wield it, she would have to pay a huge amount in damages.

Even if I had prepared the stage for her and pushed her from behind like this, if she still couldn't fight, then there was nothing I could do.

Such a useless person couldn't be saved even if God himself came.

Of course, just as Cha Ye-sol said, she would also have to pay a price.

A civil lawsuit was not an easy process.

It would consume a lot of time and mental energy, and it would cost a considerable amount of money.

Either way, she would end up paying the money that she had to pay.

'It's just that it won't be as much as Yoon Soo-ah thinks.'

Above all, the biggest advantage was that Yoon Soo-ah was completely satisfied with this consultation. She didn't know what was going to happen in the future.

By the time she found out, well.

"It'll already be too late."

* * *

The next morning.

I received the client satisfaction score for this consultation from Choi Sung-cheol through the group chat.

[Case 1 ------- 10/10]

Needless to say, it was a perfect score.