beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,654,80 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from December 1, 2015 to February 17, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the executor of the Bogeumjari Housing Project (hereinafter “instant project”) that is promoted in the area of the Bdong, Cdong, Ddong, Dong, and E-dong District of 2,031,000m2.
B. For the instant business, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 7, 2013, with respect to H 877 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant representative director G in the instant business area, for the instant business.
C. At the time, the Defendant was using a vinyl house, etc. on the ground of the instant land as a place of business.
Accordingly, on June 18, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 48,691,560 to the Defendant as compensation for the expropriation of obstacles, and the Defendant, on the same day, prepared a written consent for the removal of the disturbance to the Plaintiff.
E. The Defendant delivered the instant land to the Plaintiff on November 30, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 through 5 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. 1) According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, according to the above finding, the defendant acquired profits equivalent to the rent by occupying the land of this case without any title, and thereby incurred damages equivalent to the same amount to the plaintiff who is the owner. As such, the defendant is obligated to return this amount to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment. 2) In ordinary cases of the scope of the obligation to return unjust enrichment, the amount of profit from the possession and use of the real estate shall be the amount equivalent to the rent of the real estate.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da21856, 21863 Decided August 23, 2007, etc.). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the commission of appraiser I by the court of this case, the amount equivalent to the rent from March 7, 2013, which is the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s ownership of the instant land, to November 30, 2015, is recognized as constituting 18,654,800, when the Defendant delivered the instant land to the Plaintiff.
3 Sub-decisions.