The 46.3 million bailout money was wrongly remitted… The public office urgently pursued a 24-year-old man who gambled for 11 days: no money to pay | International | CTWANT

Taguchi Sho. (Picture / flip from IG)

Yamaguchi Prefecture Abu Town Office issued a subsidy of 100,000 yen to citizens affected by the epidemic last month, but unexpectedly remitted 463 households totaling 46.3 million yen (regarding NT$10.76 million) to 24-year-old man Sho Taguchi. Unexpectedly, Sho Taguchi refused to return it followingwards, and even gambled all the money in just 11 days.

On the 8th of last month in Amu-cho, Yamaguchi Prefecture, each household distributed 100,000 yen to families with low incomes and were affected by the epidemic. Unexpectedly, during the remittance process, the entire amount was mistakenly remitted to the account of the same family. At first, the head of the household, Taguchi Sho, said he was willing to return the money, but it took some time. Unexpectedly, the money was transferred to other accounts through more than 30 transfers.

In the end, Sho Taguchi even gambled online, and almost all the tens of millions of subsidies were gambled in just 11 days, so he didn’t pay. The Abu Town Office therefore filed a civil lawsuit once morest Taguchi Sho, demanding the return of unjust enrichment.

As soon as the news that the subsidy money was gambled out, it aroused public discussion. Japanese comedian Casulesa believes that there are many ways to use up the money within a few days, and in the case of online casinos, it leaves no assets behind, making it difficult to find proof.

According to Japanese media《Weekly Bunshun》According to the report, whether the money that was mistakenly transferred to another account will be established is still in doubt. In addition, although the government agency has filed a request for the return of unjust enrichment, the implication of returning unjust enrichment is to return it. Unjust enrichment, if you use the money for living expenses and other expenses, you are obliged to pay it back, but you don’t have to return what you lost because the existing profit has already been lost.

The report also pointed out that it is very likely that Taguchi had learned of the loophole in the return of unjust enrichment through a person with considerable legal knowledge, but because of the turmoil, he had no choice but to accept the return request.