2015Da7428 Confirmation of Non-existence of Obligations

As shown in the List of Plaintiffs in the attached Table.

Es. Es.S.P

Seoul High Court Decision 2012475798 Decided December 19, 2014

April 15, 2016

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

1. Of the total project area of this case, the lower court recognized the fact that roads 252,524 meters were reverted to the Defendant free of charge, and the total site cost included only the expenses for the portion of the State-owned or public-owned land, and did not calculate the site cost for the area to be gratuitously reverted, and in calculating the site cost for the basic living facilities among the expenses for the installation of the basic living facilities included in the purchase price for the Plaintiffs, the lower court calculated the site cost for the living facilities by means of raising the ratio of the area for the road to be installed, excluding the above gratuitously reverted portion, from the total site area excluding the above gratuitously reverted portion and then multiplying the total site cost.

2. However, we cannot accept the fact-finding and decision of the court below for the following reasons.

Since the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs is equivalent to the cost of the basic living facilities included in the sale price, the cost of the site for the basic living facilities, one of the constituent elements, must be calculated by multiplying the total area of the entire land included in the total site cost, which is the basis for the calculation of the sale price, by the said total site cost. However, according to the records, even though the existing road 252,524m is state-owned land and public land, it is known that the land gratuitously reverted to the Defendant, but the Defendant included the said free reverted land in the site cost assessed as KRW 244,87,024,326, the area of the gratuitous reverted portion should also be included in the calculation of the cost of the basic living facilities. Nevertheless, the lower court’s calculation of the cost of the site for the basic living facilities exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the calculation of the cost of the site for the basic living facilities.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Lee In-bok

Justices Kim Gin-young

Chief Justice Lee Ki-taik

A person shall be appointed.