부당이득금
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Basic Facts
The Plaintiff’s father, father, owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet, but on March 9, 201, on the real estate listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) listed in the separate sheet, to Plaintiff B, with respect to each real estate listed in paragraphs (3) and (4), and with respect to each real estate listed in paragraphs (6), to Plaintiff C, with respect to each real estate listed in paragraphs (9) and (10) (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), and with respect to each real estate listed in paragraphs (9) and (10), the registration of ownership was completed on February 18, 201 (hereinafter “instant gift agreement”).
On the other hand, E, at the time of the above transfer registration, completed the registration of ownership transfer due to each gift of the real estate listed in paragraph 5 of the attached Table to Plaintiff B, the real estate listed in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the attached Table to Plaintiff C, and each real estate listed in paragraph 11 of the attached Table to Plaintiff D.
The Plaintiffs voluntarily filed a gift tax return on each real estate listed in the separate sheet within the gift tax base return deadline, and specifically, Plaintiff A paid KRW 58,194,00 on June 30, 201, Plaintiff B paid KRW 80,071,200 on June 14, 201, Plaintiff C paid KRW 83,268,000 on April 29, 201, and Plaintiff D paid KRW 82,512,00 on June 14, 201.
On July 12, 2012, E filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs claiming for the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of each of the instant real estate by asserting that the instant donation contract, which is a donation with burden under the Incheon District Court 2012Kahap12074, was cancelled due to the Plaintiffs’ nonperformance of obligation.
On January 29, 2013, the above court rendered a judgment ordering the Plaintiffs to cancel the registration of each transfer of ownership (a judgment by service by public notice and deemed confession) and around that time, the above judgment became final and conclusive.
On September 13, 2013, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the plaintiffs with respect to each real estate of this case was cancelled on the grounds of the above final judgment.
[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, Gap 1 to 1.