부당이득금
1. Defendant B shall deliver to the Plaintiff the E field 4218 square meters in Siljin-si.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendant B.
1. The basic party-related Plaintiff is the deceased F’s husband’s wife (Death on July 25, 2006) and is the mother of the network G (Death on September 15, 2015). Defendant B is the wife of the network G, Defendant C, and Defendant D are the grandchildren of the network G.
2. Claim for extradition against Defendant B - The Plaintiff, upon receipt of the claim, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the donation made on July 23, 1997 with respect to the land of this case on July 28, 1997, and the fact that Defendant B occupied the land of this case after July 23, 1997, may not be disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of evidence No. 2 of this case.
Therefore, Defendant B should deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff who exercises the right to claim the removal of disturbance based on ownership as the owner of the instant land, unless it proves the special circumstances regarding the possessory right holder.
As to this, Defendant B’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s ownership cannot be recognized (to the effect that the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership by forging documents, etc.) and Defendant B’s statement on the evidence No. 2 is insufficient to recognize this. Since there is no sufficient evidence to reverse the presumption power of registration completed in the name of the Plaintiff, Defendant B’s assertion in this part is rejected.
This part of the plaintiff's claim is accepted.
3. The Plaintiff’s request for extradition against Defendant C and Defendant D - The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that Defendant C and Defendant D occupy the instant land together with the Defendant B, and there is no other sufficient evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.
4. The Plaintiff did not accept the claim for return of unjust enrichment against the Defendants (claim for Payment of Money) - Based on the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent arising from the Plaintiff’s possession of the instant land against the deceased G before his death, the Plaintiff sought payment (total amount of KRW 30 million) against the Defendants, who are their successors, and Defendant B and Defendant C.