logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.06.16 2016나2030430
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

The summary of the party’s assertion is that the Defendant: (a) occupied and managed the land of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”) as a road; and (b) provided it as a passage of neighboring residents; (c) obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent without any legal cause; and (d) suffered damages equivalent to the same amount as the Plaintiff incurred.

The defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff.

The original owner of the instant land provided the instant land to the general public for exclusive and exclusive use rights.

The plaintiff acquired the land of this case as a road and limited to the use and profit-making. Thus, the plaintiff cannot file a claim for return of unjust enrichment with the defendant.

In a case where a land is naturally occurring or is actually used as a road as a site for public traffic as a result of its transfer from the previous legal doctrine to the general public, if the owner of the land grants the right to free traffic to neighboring residents or the general public by providing the land as a road, or gives up exclusive and exclusive rights to use the land, it shall be determined by comprehensively examining the circumstances such as the circumstance and period he/she owns the land; the reason and scale of the sale in installments; the details and scale of the sale in installments of the remaining land; the location and nature of the land to be used as the road; the relationship with the neighboring land; the surrounding environment; and the degree of contribution to the remaining land for the effective use and profit of the divided and sold land.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da21517, Aug. 25, 2005). The original owner of the land provided a part of the land to a road site without compensation, thereby waivering the exclusive and exclusive right to use and benefit therefrom, and accordingly, residents of the land.

arrow