beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. In the first instance court’s trial scope, the Plaintiff (Appointed) filed a claim against the Defendant for the removal of buildings, the request for the delivery of site, and the claim for the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent. The first instance court dismissed the removal of buildings and the request for the delivery of site among the above claims, and accepted the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.
The defendant appealed against the losing part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.
2. The court's explanation on this part of the facts is identical to the statement No. 3, No. 12, and No. 4, and No. 7 among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of
3. Determination on the claim for return of unjust enrichment
A. The summary of the cause of the claim is that the Defendant gains unjust enrichment by occupying the instant land from July 6, 2015, which he/she acquired the ownership of the instant housing from July 6, 2015, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties.
B. Determination as to the cause of a claim 1) Even if a transferee of a building with statutory superficies is in a position to refuse a claim for removal of the building owner or delivery of the site in the position to acquire the legal superficies for the future, the substantial gain accrued from the occupancy and use of the site is an unjust enrichment and thus, is obligated to return it to the site owner. A person who owns a building on the land owned by another person without authority, barring any special circumstance, gains a profit equivalent to the rent of the land from another’s property without legal cause and thereby causes a loss to another person (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da6144 delivered on September 15, 195).