beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.09.02 2015나55514

부당이득금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff A shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is against the plaintiff A, 574.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Since March 18, 1950, the Plaintiff owned real estate Nos. 1 and 2 in the separate sheet (1) as indicated in the ownership relationship of each land of this case (hereinafter “instant No. 1 and 2”) from March 18, 1950.

(2) The real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 3 and 4 (hereinafter “instant Nos. 3 and 4”) was owned by the network K from April 7, 1969. However, as K died on July 11, 1974, Plaintiff B inherited the shares of Plaintiff B 1/17, Plaintiff C’s shares of 6/17, Plaintiff D and E, each of 4/17 shares, and net F 2/17 shares.

Since then on September 27, 1995, F shared inheritance of F’s shares in proportion to Plaintiff B, C, D, and E in proportion to 1/4, and currently owned by Plaintiff B, Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff D, respectively in proportion to 18/68.

B. Each of the instant lands was classified as a road from around 1956 to around 1958. On January 26, 1968, as it was incorporated into a local highway G according to the Gyeonggi-do Public Notice L’s public notice on the change of local highway route, and has been used for the general public’s passage as a road until now.

C. From February 1, 1992, the Defendant occupied and managed each of the roads in this case as the road management authority from February 1, 1992.

[Based on Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap evidence 5 through 9, Eul evidence 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the establishment of the right to claim restitution of unjust enrichment, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant gains unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent while occupying and managing each of the instant land as a road.

Therefore, the plaintiffs, who are the owners of each road of this case, are obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to their rents.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant is the owner of each of the instant lands during the period of road expansion and packing construction since each of the instant lands was incorporated into local highway G around 1968.