beta
Text
1. The defendant,
A. On December 3, 2019, Plaintiff A, C, and D, KRW 5,570, KRW 7,596, and each of the above amounts were paid to Plaintiff B, and KRW 7,596.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff A, C, and D own 11/48 shares in each of the 310 square meters of the F prior to the Yangju-si (hereinafter “instant land”); and the Plaintiff C owns 15/48 shares in the instant land.
B. The Defendant entered into a sales contract on September 5, 2002 with respect to G land and factory buildings on its ground (hereinafter “instant factory”) at Yangju-si, and completed the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant on September 17, 2002.
(c)
The factory of this case is located immediately adjacent to the land of this case, and the part 307 square meters of "A" (hereinafter referred to as "parking part") which connects each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 8, 9, 10, and 100 square meters of "A" (hereinafter referred to as "parking part") is a parking lot, and the part 3 square meters of "B" portion (hereinafter referred to as "factory site portion") which connects each point of 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 7, 16, and 15 of the same drawings are used as a site for the factory of this case.
【Non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 6 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence No. 1, the result of the appraiser H’s survey, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts, the defendant owned the building of this case on the ground of the site of the factory site of this case without authority, thereby gaining profits equivalent to rent of the above part without legal grounds, and thereby causing losses to the plaintiffs. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return it to unjust profits.
2) However, according to Article 201(1) of the Civil Act, a bona fide possessor shall be deemed to have acquired the fruits of an object in possession, and Article 197(1) of the Civil Act provides that possession shall be presumed to have been bona fide. However, Article 197(2) of the same Act provides that even if a bona fide possessor loses a lawsuit on this right, he/she shall be deemed to have been a bona fide possessor at the time when the lawsuit is instituted. However, the purport of Article 197(2) of the same Act and the return of unjust gains.