logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016.08.24 2016다221245
부당이득금
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. A land purchaser who has not yet received the registration of ownership transfer;

If the land is delivered due to the performance of a sales contract, it shall be deemed that the owner has the right to possess and use the land as the validity of the sales contract.

(1) The co-owners have the right to exclusively occupy and use the partition of co-owned property in the process of implementing the procedure for the transfer of co-owned shares as a result of the co-ownership agreement, unless otherwise agreed by the co-owners, even though a part of co-owners exclusively possess and use a specific part of co-owned property, if the co-owners agreed to be the sole ownership of co-owners possessing such part among co-owned property, the co-owners have the right to exclusively occupy and use it in the process of performing the procedure for the transfer of co-owned property share

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the reasoning of the first instance judgment partially accepted by the lower court, the lower court: (a) purchased the said share from C, which was owned from around 1973, on May 19, 2013, 725/1,367 shares in B maintained B on May 19, 2013 (hereinafter “instant real estate”); and completed the registration of transfer of the said share; and (b) notified the Defendant of the assignment of the instant claim by delivery of a duplicate of the complaint after receiving the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against the Defendant who incurred the said share from C at the time of the said purchase; and (b) included the portion (i) 1,248 square meters in the attached drawings attached to the lower judgment among the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant reservoir”) as part of D (hereinafter “instant reservoir”); and (c) recognized the fact that the Defendant maintained and managed the instant reservoir as agricultural infrastructure; and (d) based on the point of time of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant’s unlawful profits from the occupancy or loss of the Plaintiff’s unlawful profits (including unjust enrichment.

arrow