beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)
A. Of the area of 88 square meters in Dong-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City, indication 5, 8, 10, 11, 11 of the annexed drawings.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant owned the hospital building on the land of Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon, and used the land E as the parking lot for the above building.
B. The Plaintiff owns a building of 88 square meters in Dong-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City, Daejeon Special Metropolitan City, which is adjacent to the land D and E.
C. On August 16, 2010, the Defendant: (a) sold garbage and waste on the part of 65 square meters in the part on the part of the land located in the ship connected in sequence 5, 8, 10, 10, 11, 13, 12, 9, 6, 14, 15, 15, 3, and 5 of the attached drawings among the land owned by the Plaintiff, and used the land of this case as a parking lot from around that time.
With respect to the instant land, the rent from December 7, 2010 to January 31, 2017 is KRW 11,578,400, and monthly rent from February 1, 2017 is KRW 168,025.
[Based on recognition] Evidence A 1, Evidence B 10, and 11, Evidence A 1, Evidence A 5-2, each photographic image, the result of survey appraisal, the purport of the entire pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit
A. According to the above basic facts, the Defendant: (a) packaged concrete packaging on the instant land owned by the Plaintiff; and (b) obtained unjust enrichment by using the instant land as a parking lot; (c) barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to remove concrete packaging installed on the instant land and deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff; and (d) from December 7, 2010 to the date of removal of concrete packaging and delivery of the instant land.
B. On August 2010, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s expense, treats wastes loaded on the instant land and wastes buried on the instant land, and instead, claims for unjust enrichment equivalent to the removal of concrete packaging and the rent, as the Defendant consented to the use of the instant land free of charge while managing the instant land in concrete packaging. As such, the Defendant asserts that the removal of concrete packaging and the claim for unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent is unjust.
A-No. 4.