beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.11.02 2015가단145433

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

(Contents) On August 13, 2009, the judgment of Seoul Northern District Court 2007Gahap24777 was rendered on August 13, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the "the judgment") among the co-owners of 32 lots, such as the Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu D major 69С, and the plaintiffs and the defendants in the judgment were sentenced to the "the plaintiff's judgment" and the "the defendant's judgment", and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 15, 2015 at the appellate court after remanding the case after the appellate court and the final appeal.

Based on the part possessed at the date of the closing of argument, the plaintiff group shall divide it in kind and own the specific part, and the remaining part shall be divided in kind by the defendant group according to the share, but with respect to the part divided in excess of the share of the plaintiff group as a result of the division in kind as above, the plaintiff group shall compensate for the value to each defendant group.

Since the plaintiff and the defendants were belonging to the plaintiff group, the part of the land possessed respectively in the judgment was divided in kind.

On the other hand, as above, the part which the plaintiff group possesses in reality is divided in kind on the basis of the actual possession of each group, and the defendant group of the judgment was divided in kind in the co-ownership form less than the plaintiff group of the judgment, compared to the shares originally possessed.

Therefore, in order to collect the shortage from the defendant group in the form of price compensation, the judgment was sentenced that the plaintiff group should pay the amount equivalent to the shortage to each defendant group jointly and severally.

However, in order to calculate the value of the shortage, the subject decision is the value of the part that has been divided in kind by the plaintiff group as shown in the attached Table 5 (the "value of the divided part" in the attached Table 5).