부당이득금
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) shall be subject to the above revoked part.
The reason why the trial of basic facts is explained on this part is as stated in Paragraph (1) of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, in addition to the fact that the first head of the judgment of the court of first instance "(No. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance)" (No. 18 of the judgment of the court of first instance) is "the plaintiff and the designated parties (the appointed parties died on December 27, 2013 in which the lawsuit of first instance was pending, and as a result of the agreement on the division of inherited property among the inheritors, the designated parties died on December 27, 2013 in which the proceedings were taken over)."
The project of this case, which is the cause of the Plaintiff, constitutes a public project under Article 4 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”), as a residential environment improvement project in the form of local improvement under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”). The Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation, as part of the relocation measures prescribed in Article 78(1) of the Land Compensation Act, sold multi-family housing (multi-family housing) constructed within H site development project area to the Plaintiff and the designated parties, the Defendants should bear the cost of installing basic living facilities as the implementer of the
Therefore, the part which did not deduct basic living costs from each sales contract of this case is null and void in violation of the mandatory law.
Nevertheless, the Defendants had the Plaintiff and the designated parties pay each purchase price, including the cost of basic living facilities, to the Defendants in accordance with each of the instant sales contracts. The Defendants exempted the Defendants from paying the money corresponding to the cost of basic living facilities to be borne by themselves, thereby gaining profits equivalent to the above money, and the Plaintiff and the designated parties suffered damages equivalent to the same amount.
Therefore, the Defendants are against the Plaintiff and the designated parties, and the Plaintiff and the designated parties.