부당이득금반환
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. From December 4, 2005 to December 3, 2008, the Plaintiff served as the Defendant’s director and the Defendant’s chief director from December 4, 2008 to December 4, 2011.
B. On November 11, 2008, the Plaintiff, who had engaged in the construction business with the trade name C, entered into a contract for repair and repair works (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the content that the Plaintiff may alter the original form of the existing house by maintaining the construction cost of KRW 65 million with respect to D- ground districts managed by the Defendant and the Defendant, and by maintaining the original form of the existing house to the maximum extent possible.
C. According to the instant construction contract, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the construction price of KRW 18 million with the down payment on November 11, 2008, KRW 29 million with the intermediate payment on November 24, 2008, KRW 20 million with the intermediate payment on November 24, 2008, and KRW 18 million with the remainder on December 22, 2008 and January 7, 2009.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul's entry in the evidence No. 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. The plaintiff asserted that the construction of the building (hereinafter "the building of this case") was completed on or around November 2008 under the construction contract of this case after the Gu was removed and the construction of the new building ("the building of this case") was completed. As a result of the defendant's filing of a lawsuit for damages claim, the building of this case was still owned before the plaintiff was originally acquired and demolished, but the defendant still occupied and used the building for the events of the Confucian Foundation of this case and the purpose of memorial services, etc. without legitimate legal title. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 18.5 million won which is equivalent to the rent for the period from December 208 to 79 months.
B. The Defendant illegally occupied the instant building solely on the basis of each description of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 11.
It is insufficient to recognize that the use of the building of this case was practically beneficial, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.