beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.11 2015나58098

부당이득금

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government L. L. 42.9 square meters (hereinafter “instant road”) was divided into 600 square meters prior to the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government AB, and the division arrangement was completed on January 22, 1981, and the land category was changed from “B” to “road.”

B. M who was the owner of the instant road (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) died on June 21, 201, she left Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, C, D, E, and F.

C. Around 1979, R owned a building on the instant site (hereinafter “the instant building site”) owned by the deceased, Seocho-gu, Seoul N-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “the instant building site”) adjacent to the instant road. D. Around 1979, R newly built a building on the instant building site.

Around 1985, the Deceased acquired the ownership of the building of this case, and around 1988, sold the site of this case and the building of this case to S, and thereafter, the site of this case and the building of this case were assigned in sequence to T, U, and the Defendant.

E. After acquiring the ownership of the instant building site and the instant building, the Defendant permitted the instant building, and newly built a new building on the instant building site on March 24, 2015.

F. The road of this case is a longer rectangular type with a width of about two meters. The only length is to contribute to the road of this case from the site of this case, and the defendant currently uses the road of this case for traffic.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 9, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion did not waive their exclusive rights to use and benefit from the road of this case, and the legal relationship between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant regarding the road of this case is a loan for use. In addition, the Deceased had used the road of this case for about 30 years, and there was a considerable change in the road of this case by purchasing the site of this case and constructing a new building.