부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: “Defendant” of the first head of the third and fourth first head of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be “Plaintiff,” and the latter part of the 13th of the 14th of the 13th of the 13th of the 3th of the 3th of the 3th of the 14th of the 14th of the 13th of the 13th of the 13th of the 13th of the 13th of the 13th of the 196th of the 196th of the 196th of the 196th of the 1
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. Even if the contractor of the instant construction contract is deemed to be C, as the Plaintiff is an individual company, the Plaintiff is deemed to be the actual party to the instant construction contract, and the actual payer of the farmland preservation charge pursuant to the instant construction contract shall be deemed to be the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant, as the owner of the instant land, is liable to pay farmland preservation charges, is obligated to return the farmland preservation charges to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
B. The reasoning of the judgment and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone are not sufficient to recognize the substantial party to the instant contract and the person who paid farmland preservation charges as the Plaintiff. Moreover, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have immediately reverted to the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that C is the actual individual company of the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim on a different premise is without merit without further review.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.