부당이득금반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On February 25, 2013, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) leased approximately KRW 1.50 square meters from the Defendant, from the Defendant, for a lease deposit of KRW 10 million; (b) monthly rent of KRW 2 million; (c) from February 25, 2013, for a fixed period of 12 months from February 25, 2013; and (d) began in the water-based business; and (e) the said lease agreement was renewed at the expiration of the lease period and maintained its effect.
However, among the entire land used by the Plaintiff as a high-water site, the forest of this case is smaller than about 30 square meters, and the remainder is part of neighboring state-owned land (D. 43784m2 in Yanyang-gu in Yanyang-gu) and land owned by a third party (Yanyang-gu E. 1262m2).
Ultimately, from February 25, 2013 to February 8, 2013, the Defendant received approximately KRW 120 out of the forest land of this case, which was not used by the Plaintiff, from the Plaintiff, thereby unjust enrichment.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 30 million won as part of the unjust enrichment during the above period and damages for delay.
2. We examine the judgment, as long as the validity of the above lease agreement remains effective, the lessor, as the lessor, has legitimate authority to receive the rent prescribed in the above lease agreement from the Plaintiff, as the lessee, as well as the fact that the Plaintiff used approximately 30 square meters of the forest land in this case and approximately 211 square meters of land (69 square meters) as a high-water site, contrary to the Plaintiff’s assertion, in full view of the purport of the entire argument in the statement No. 10, the Plaintiff’s assertion on unjust enrichment is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.