2. B

2. D Co., Ltd.

3. E.

2. The plaintiffs' promotion committee of the defendant C Regional Housing Association, the remaining claims against the defendant D and the claims against the defendant E are all dismissed.

3. Of the litigation costs, the costs incurred between the Plaintiffs and Defendant C District Housing Association Promotion Committee, Defendant C District Housing Association Promotion Committee, Defendant D Company, Plaintiffs and Defendant E are borne respectively by the Plaintiffs.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

interest rate of 15% per annum from the day after the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

(D) each payment.

A. Defendant (tentative name)’s regional housing association promotion committee (hereinafter “Defendant Association promotion committee”) is the so-called promotion committee for the establishment of the regional housing association based on the relevant laws, such as Article 11 of the Housing Act, for the purpose of promoting the business of constructing the apartment housing (sale) with 1,494 households in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, 438 households, total 1,932 households and welfare facilities in the apartment (lease) 438 households, total 1,932 households, neighborhood living facilities with 39 floors and 15 units in the underground and ground, with the aim of promoting the business of constructing the apartment (hereinafter “instant business”).

Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant D”) is the so-called executing agency which entered into a management service contract with the Defendant Partnership Promotion Committee for the execution of the instant project.

B. On October 31, 2016, Defendant B entered into a subscription agreement with the Defendant Cooperative Promotion Committee and the regional housing association to be established at the future (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). The application form attached to the latter part of each subscription agreement (Article 5-1, 2-2) is written in the form of application form for Plaintiff A, and KRW 165 square meters in the case of Plaintiff B, KRW 27 square meters in the case of Plaintiff B, and KRW 27 in the case of Plaintiff B, respectively, in the column of “Dong and lake” and “H in the case of Plaintiff B,” but the following phrase is written in the following. Article 7 of the instant contract: (a) the amount and time of payment of contributions, and the method of payment of contributions; and (b) the amount of application form for Plaintiff B is written in the column of “A” and “B,” respectively, and (c) the same and several subparagraphs are written in each of the following different forms of payment methods.

In addition, Article 5 provides that the defendant company shall be selected as the management service company for the project of this case, and the management service contract of the partnership shall be concluded separately by the defendant union promotion committee, and the management service contract of the partnership shall be paid in 25,000,000 per household.

C. Under the instant contract, Plaintiff A deposited KRW 49,482,00 at around that time, and Plaintiff B deposited KRW 47,926,000 at around that time, and Plaintiff B deposited KRW 47,926,00, respectively. The ground for recognition is without dispute, Nonparty 5 (including the branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination on the claim against the Defendant Association Promotion Committee and the Defendant Company

(a) Facts of recognition;

1 ) 이 사건 계약서와 함께 작성된 가입신청서의 동 ·호수 란 에 'G호', 'H호가 각 기재된 점, 그러나 위 가입신청서에는 본문 아래 작은 글씨로 '동·호수는 사업계획 승인 이후 착공 전 추첨 후기입 예정'이라고 인쇄되어 있는 점은 앞서 본 바와 같다. 2 ) 나아가 갑제 1 ,2, 3, 4, 6 내지 11호증, 을제1호증 의 각 기재, 이 법원의 영등포구청장에 대한 사실 조회결과에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 다음 사실이 인정된다. 즉, 이 사건 계약서 제2조에는 총세대수, 건축 규모 등 이 사건 사업의 개요를 기재하면서 상기 사업개요는 향후 사업추진 및 인 ·허가 과정에서 변경될 수 있으며 사업계획 승인 시 확정됨』 이라는 기재가, 제7조 제5항에는 『※ 상기조합원 분담금은 각 주택형별 층별 금액이며, 향후 각종 심의 및 사업계획승인 과정 중(설계, 구조변경 포함 ) 분양 면적에 차이가 있을 경우에는 조합원 분담금의 변동이 있을 수 있다. 이에 대하여 어떠한 이의도 제기하지 않는다. 는 기재가, 제7조 제9항에는 특약사항으로

(4) The recruitment of union members shall be conducted by each type of household (2 to 5 stories), Na (6 to 10 stories), Da (11 to 15 stories), Ra (16 to 20 stories), Ga (31 to 35 stories), Ga (36 to 39 stories), Ga (36 from 39 stories), Ga (36 to 39 stories), and Ga (36 from 39 stories) after the approval of a project plan is commenced, and , ... The method and time of drawing of Dong and Dong numbers shall be determined by entrusting the promotion committee or the board of directors with the determination of the project plan.* Members who did not pay the cooperative contributions (f) and management service expenses by the lottery time of Dong and Dong units shall be excluded from the designation of Dong and Dong units by a resolution of the board of directors, and any objection shall not be raised against them. Article 16(10) of the Act provides that even if a change in the project plan is made, the number of land and Dong units shall not be purchased.

The Defendant Cooperative Promotion Committee entered into an agency contract with the Defendant Company, and entered into an agreement with the members of the Defendant Company, and decided on the plan for the recruitment of the members of the association, and decided on the sale of the housing units, including the recruitment of the members of the association. The majority of the advertisements conducted through the Internet Bloet for the recruitment of the members of the association and the sale of the apartment units. As such, even though the majority of the advertisements had already been established before the establishment of the association, detailed statement was made about the number of apartment units to be constructed, the number of buildings, the number of floors, the number of households, the charges, and the unit price per square, and the designation and number of units in the subscription contract without going through any procedure such as consultation through the Defendant Cooperative Promotion Committee or by the employees of the Defendant Company, etc., and without obtaining the consent of 462 of the owners of the housing sites until the end of October 2019, the Plaintiffs did not enter into the new apartment units or the agreement for the establishment of the Plaintiff Association as soon as possible.

The Defendants asserted to the effect that when a district unit plan is established, a district unit plan is to proceed with the project in this case by proposing the formulation of a district unit plan rather than the project of a regional housing association according to the present condition, the project in this case, which is a Class-II general residential area, a district subject to the development of a housing site under Article 15 of the Housing Act, may be modified, and a district subject to the district unit plan may be established in a district unit plan, and if a district unit plan or district unit plan is determined by an urban management plan, a specific use area may be abolished in the district unit plan

B. Determination

In full view of the above facts and the circumstances inferred from them, the project in this case is implemented by a regional housing association under the Housing Act. Due to its nature, it cannot specify the number of Dongs and units that will be allocated to the applicants for joining the association at the stage of the establishment of the housing association, and there is a detailed provision of the contract in this case prepared by the defendant association promotion committee and the defendant company itself, and it stated that the number of units and units of the contract in this case are determined by lot, but it is reasonable to view that the defendant association promotion committee, the defendant company, or its employees deceiving the plaintiffs as if the "Ghoho" and "Hho" were allocated to the plaintiffs like the sale in general apartment, and that they were the plaintiffs to enter into the contract in this case.

Therefore, the expression of intent of the plaintiffs to conclude the contract of this case is fraudulent and thus can be revoked pursuant to Article 110(1) of the Civil Act. Since the expression of intent to revoke is included, the complaint of this case was lawfully revoked on August 29, 2019, which is the date of the first day of pleading, which was stated with the Defendant Association Promotion Committee. Accordingly, the Defendant Association Promotion Committee, as a return of unjust enrichment upon cancellation, has the obligation to pay damages for delay calculated at a rate of 12% per annum from August 30, 2019 to the date of the first day of pleading, which is the day following the first day of pleading, to the day of full payment, to the day of the first day of pleading, to the day of full payment. In full view of the facts and circumstances acknowledged earlier, the Defendant Association Promotion Committee delegated the business of this case to its employees, and led them to enter into the contract of this case and to promote the sale of advertisement of this case, and thereby, caused the Plaintiffs to jointly pay the above money to the Defendant Association.

As such, the Plaintiffs received a claim for return of unjust enrichment on the ground of revocation, it is not determined as to the claim for return of unjust enrichment due to the cancellation of the obligation asserted as a selective cause, and the claim for return of unjust enrichment due to the withdrawal from the partnership.

3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant E

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The Defendant Company jointly with the Defendant Partnership Promotion Committee, and Defendant E, the representative of the Defendant Partnership Promotion Committee, also led the progress of the instant business, and as seen earlier, had the Defendant Partnership Promotion Committee and the Defendant Company deceptions the Plaintiffs to its employees, etc. Therefore, Defendant E bears the same responsibility as the Defendant Partnership Promotion Committee and the Defendant Company.

B. Determination

As seen earlier, the Defendant Association Promotion Committee and the Defendant Company deceivings the Plaintiffs in entering into the instant contract by advertising the instant business and entering into the instant agency contract. However, such circumstance does not serve as a legal basis to deem that the Defendant Association and the separate individual Defendant E bears jointly and severally with the Defendant Association Promotion Committee or the Defendant Company the obligation to return unjust enrichment arising from the cancellation or cancellation of the instant contract, and the obligation to return unjust enrichment arising from the withdrawal of the association, and there is no other specific assertion or proof as to the grounds to view it otherwise.

The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant E are rejected.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant union promotion committee and the defendant company are justified within the above recognition scope, and the remaining claims against the defendant union promotion committee and the defendant company and the claims against the defendant E are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

On August 29, 2019, the next day of the date when the complaint of this case was made on August 29, 2019 without being served on the Defendant Association Promotion Council.

From the beginning, the damages for delay shall be recognized.