Love to buy a house, leaving only the man's name. When you divorce, the woman knows that she has no share.

During the period of love, the man spent money to buy a house. When the couple divorced, the woman discovered that the property had become the man's personal property before marriage, which means that the woman had no share. The woman filed a lawsuit for this, claiming that the down payment was "my share" and didn't know that the house didn't have its own name. Recently, the No.1 Intermediate People's Court made a final judgment: the man returned the down payment.

It is understood that the plaintiff Xiao Jing and the defendant Xiao Yong established a love relationship around 2007. Xiao Yong bought a set of affordable housing in Yubei District on June 5438+065438+ 10, 2009, with a house price of more than 230,000 yuan and a down payment of more than 79,000 yuan.

2011February, the sweet Valentine's Day, Xiao Yong and Xiaojing got married, but their marriage was not sweet. On October 7th, 20 13/kloc-0, 65438+ Xiao Jing sued the Jiulongpo District Court for divorce and division of property. At this time, Xiao Jing knew that Xiao Yong was the only one in the house. In this case, Xiao Jing's claim is to ask Xiao Yong to pay the down payment of 59,000 yuan for the house before marriage.

The Jiulongpo District Court ruled that the house in Yubei District belongs to Xiao Yong, because it is pre-marital property, and the judgment refused to deal with it on the grounds that the 59,000 yuan was not the joint property of husband and wife or the joint debt of husband and wife, and both parties negotiated or claimed their rights separately.

2065438+In March 2004, Xiao Jing sued the Yubei District Court, demanding an order to return the deposit of 59,000 yuan. Xiao Yong argued that this 59,000 yuan was deposited by his father in Xiaojing Bank Card and transferred to the developer.

The court found that there were 59,000 yuan in the down payment, and it was indeed the plaintiff Xiaojing who used his bank card to transfer it to the developer's account through credit card consumption.

The court held that Xiao Yong claimed that after his father withdrew money from the bank, he deposited 59,000 yuan into Xiaojing's account. Xiao Yong's land acquisition compensation payment form and bank withdrawal voucher can only prove that he has the corresponding funds and sources of funds, but can't prove that the funds exist in Xiao Jing's account.

The court held that if there is no legal basis to obtain improper benefits and cause losses to others, the improper benefits obtained should be returned to the person who suffered losses. Xiao Yong got Xiaojing's bank deposit of 59,000 yuan during her love with Xiaojing, and there was no loan or gift agreement between the two parties. Xiao Yong obtained the money without legal basis, which caused Xiao Jing's loss and constituted unjust enrichment, and should return the money to Xiao Jing.

On this basis, Yubei District Court ruled that Xiao Yong returned Xiao Jing's unjust enrichment of 59,000 yuan. City No.1 Intermediate People's Court finally upheld the first-instance judgment.

(The above answers were published on 20 16-05-23. Please refer to the actual situation for the current purchase policy. )

Sohu Focus Network provides you with comprehensive information such as real estate information, real estate details, purchase process, owners' forum and home decoration.