1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to adding the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance to the corresponding part, and therefore, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined

A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s assertion shall be excluded from the area where basic living facilities are installed in the instant development zone, on the ground that the road management agency’s gratuitous reversion of the 282,366 square meters of the 475,695 square meters in the road within the instant development zone was not included in the site cost.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in light of the overall purport of the arguments, the sales contract was concluded on the premise that the average site cost of the instant development zone was paid to the buyers including the Plaintiffs and the Defendant on the road area gratuitously reverted to the Defendant, and the part equivalent to the site cost of the road area gratuitously reverted to the Defendant is excluded from the sales price of the instant land. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

① The reason why the Defendant is obliged to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the cost of installing basic living facilities installed in the development zone of this case is that the part which reflects the cost of installing basic living facilities in the sale contract of this case is invalid, and there is no legal ground that the Defendant has the invalid part of the sale price.

In principle, the method that reflects the cost of the basic living facilities when calculating the sale price of this case, shall be based on the calculation of the cost of the basic living facilities to be returned by the defendant as unjust enrichment.

(2) When calculating the development cost of the development zone of this case, the defendant shall calculate the total site area of the development zone 2,708.