beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.08.18 2016가합57507

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Relevant Plaintiff of the parties is prior to the amendment by Act No. 14344, Dec. 2, 2016.

c. The term “former Housing Act”;

(B) Article 32 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27444, Aug. 11, 2016) and Article 37 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27444, Aug. 11, 2016); and the Defendant is a general urban gas business entity under Article 2 subparag. 2 and subparag. 4 of the Urban Gas Business Act. (1) The passage of the instant case, the Plaintiff, to the Intervenor joining the Defendant on December 4, 20

32,004 square meters (hereinafter “instant housing site”) in the household parcel number CBL multi-family housing site.

(2) On July 3, 2014, the Defendant’s Intervenor, who was obligated to install gas arterial facilities at its cost pursuant to Article 23 of the former Housing Act, requested the Defendant to implement construction works to supply city gas used in the instant project area. (3) On September 9, 2013, the Defendant’s Intervenor approved the Defendant’s urban gas supply facility cost for the instant project area as KRW 2,200,000 ( separate value-added tax) and paid KRW 550,000 among them to the Defendant. (4) The Defendant’s Intervenor, on September 25, 2014, pursuant to relevant Acts and subordinate statutes including the Urban Gas Business Act, notified the Plaintiff of the Plaintiff of the cost of urban gas facilities charges for the instant housing facilities charges (including value-added tax charges for urban gas facilities charges for the instant housing facilities) and the Plaintiff’s payment of the cost of urban gas facilities charges for the instant project.

(5) The Defendant entered into a contract on January 9, 2015.