beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. On May 7, 2004, the plaintiffs received 1/2 shares from the non-party D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "non-party D") each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "the instant store") and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant store on February 4, 2008. The facts that the defendant occupied, used, and used the instant store from October 2008 to October 201 can be acknowledged by taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole, and there is no dispute between the parties, or the facts that the defendant occupied, used, and used the instant store from October 208 to October 2015.
B. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiffs, the owner of the instant store, and return unjust enrichment from the use and profit-making of the instant store, as long as it did not prove the lawful source of right to possess the instant store.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The main point of the argument is that the defendant occupied the store of this case in accordance with each lease agreement between the non-party company and the non-party company that entered into an exchange contract with the plaintiffs for the store of this case and the non-party E who purchased the store of this case. Thus, the defendant's possession is a lawful possession based
B. The purchaser of the land did not obtain the registration of ownership transfer.
If the land is delivered as a result of the performance of a sales contract, it shall be deemed that the effect of the sales contract has the right to possess and use the land, and it is reasonable to view that the purchaser of the land again acquires the right to possess and use the land above. Therefore, the seller cannot make a claim for restitution of unjust enrichment on the ground that the purchaser of the land again exercises a real right right against the purchaser based on the ownership of the land, or is a benefit without any legal ground, and this legal principle shall be applied in accord and satisfaction.