beta
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2008.01.30 2006가합10725

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Gap evidence No. 21.

On February 6, 2006, the conjunctive Defendant decided to perform the construction of V-ro extension with the content of expanding the V-ro from the V tunnel located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City to the 6th line to the 8th line. On March 22, 2006, as the ownership housing or land was incorporated into the road zone of the said construction project, the Defendant announced relocation measures to the Plaintiffs who lose their base of livelihood as part of the relocation measures for the housing owner, as part of the relocation measures for the housing owner, the right to occupy the apartment house with a size of 85 square meters or less within the Y Housing Site Development Zone, and for the tenants, the relocation measures for V-ro extension project was announced to select one of the apartment house rights or housing relocation expenses with a size of 60 square meters or less within the said zone as part of the relocation measures.

B. According to the above relocation measures announcement, between May 11, 2006 and May 15, 2006, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract for the sale of each apartment unit with each of the following amounts: (a) as to one apartment unit among the apartment units constructed and sold by the above Defendant in the Y Housing Site Development Zone (hereinafter “each apartment unit of this case”) among the apartment units constructed and sold by the above Defendant in the Y Housing Site Development Zone (hereinafter “each apartment unit of this case”).

C. The Plaintiffs paid each amount stated in the calculation table 1, such as the amount of unjust enrichment in attached Form 2, to the primary Defendant as the sales price in accordance with the above sales contract.

2. Determination

A. The primary Defendant’s claim is that the primary Defendant, who is a project implementer, is requested to specially supply housing from the primary Defendant, and that the Plaintiffs should bear necessary expenses for basic living facilities according to the relevant regional conditions, such as roads, water supply facilities, drainage facilities, and other public facilities, etc. in the relocation settlement site pursuant to Article 78(4) of the Public Works Act.