logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.01.14 2015가단73534
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. There is no dispute between the parties to the basic facts, or comprehensively taking account of the entries and videos in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff received a donation of 512m2 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the "land in this case") from the husband of Kimhae-si, the husband of May 27, 1995, and the land in this case is located in one of the roads connecting Eul in Kimhae-si, such as the part indicated by the sound management of the cadastral map (attached Form).

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff without any title occupied and managed the instant land as a road without any title, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff may not seek a return of unjust enrichment from the Defendant, since it is deemed that the Plaintiff renounced the exclusive right to use and benefit from the instant land.

3. Determination

A. In a case where the State or a local government grants the right of free traffic to the general public by providing the land as a road to the state or a local government, which opened, occupied, or managed the land as above, in a case where the land in question is offered for the general traffic, regardless of the legal procedures, such as the Road Act or the Urban Planning Act, on the private land where the State or the local government was actually used or not used for the general public, the State or the local government, who opened, occupied, or managed it as a road, may not claim a return of unjust enrichment on the ground of an unlawful possession.

The land owner has renounced the right to use and benefit if any private land is naturally occurring or is classified as a road site and is actually used as a general traffic route.

If it is interpreted that a consent to use as a road has been obtained, it shall be the location of the land used as the developments or period for which the land was purchased, or as the de facto road.

arrow