부당이득금반환
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the donation of this case was null and void as an unfair legal act provided for in Article 104 of the Civil Act, since the Plaintiff donated the land of this case to the Defendant without any consideration, it is not a legal act of a nature that could discuss whether it is fair, and that the contract for the sale of the site and building for senior citizen center under the second Convention was merely a result of the Plaintiff’s implementation of the terms and conditions for approval of the business plan of this case by the Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor, Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor, and that the donation of this case was merely a result of the Plaintiff’s consultation with the Defendant, who is an administrative body separate from the Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor, and thus, it is difficult to view that the contract for the sale
Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by recognizing facts contrary to the experience and logic rules or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the method of interpretation of contracts
2. Examining the records as to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the donation in this case constitutes an act contrary to social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act or an illegal act committed by the public officials belonging to the Defendant, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the method of interpreting the contract, the unfair juristic act,
3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices.