부당이득금반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts - The defendant is a clan, the purpose of which is to protect a grave, a tomb, or a tombstone of Jung-si D.
- The land of this case was originally owned by G and seven other persons, who had a domicile in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, but on October 12, 1994, the ownership transfer registration for the land of this case was made in the Defendant.
- Korea finished the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land on the ground of the acquisition through consultation around May 2014, and paid approximately KRW 1.8 billion to the Defendant, and the Defendant, by the resolution of the board of directors around August 3, 2014, paid KRW 800 million out of the above compensation to eight co-owners of the instant land each by one hundred million.
- There are two persons related to the defendant clan who have the name of G, one of whom is the plaintiff, and the remaining one is the person in Seongbuk-gu Seoul F (hereinafter, referred to as "F").
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3, 4 evidence, Eul 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion includes the address of G in F as the address of one of eight former co-owners on the registry of the instant land, and the Plaintiff’s resident registration number is indicated as the Plaintiff’s resident registration number (H). As such, the Plaintiff is a G in which the G and the resident registration number on the registry were consistent and the tax was paid up to the amount of tax.
Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay KRW 100 million and damages for delay to the plaintiff who is not G in F.
B. We examine whether the Plaintiff shared the instant land.
As seen earlier, G’s address in F is indicated at the address of one of eight co-owners on the registry of the instant land, and unlike the Plaintiff’s assertion, G’s resident registration number is not indicated on the registry of the instant land.
(Reasons for Recognition: Evidence A, Nos. 3 and 4): Provided, That this case’s land cadastre for the instant land.