beta
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.01.10 2019나13699

부당이득금반환

Text

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.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 25, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by purchasing a ground building of 32,697 square meters in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant building”). The Defendant is the owner of the land where the instant building is located.

B. On July 2016, after receiving the successful bid of the instant building, the Plaintiff sought to enter into a lease agreement with the Defendant, who is the landowner, with respect to 721 square meters of land corresponding to the site of the instant building among the land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant land”).

However, on July 5, 2016, the Defendant: (a) concluded a lease agreement on the instant land on behalf of the Plaintiff with Nonparty D, the former owner of the instant building, from around the beginning of 2012 to the beginning of 2016 (hereinafter “instant overdue rent”); (b) prepared and delivered to the Defendant a letter of payment of rent that the Plaintiff would pay a total of KRW 14,192,000 (hereinafter “instant performance letter”); and (c) on November 28, 2016, paid KRW 10,000 out of the overdue rent to the Defendant.

C. Meanwhile, on July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease contract with respect to the instant land as KRW 3,072,00, annual rent 3,072,00, and lease period from July 5, 2016 to December 31, 2016, and the Plaintiff uses and benefits from the instant land by owning the instant building until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1 was prepared with the agreement of this case that the Plaintiff would inevitably pay D arrears in order to conclude a lease contract with the Defendant as the Plaintiff purchased the instant building on another’s land in a voluntary auction procedure.

Therefore, this is applicable.