logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.04.20 2018나2000495
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. E is the process of dividing the land in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F land 1) E from August 5, 1967, the administrative name of the land in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F land (hereinafter referred to as “land”) is omitted and its lot number is specified only.

2) On November 1, 1967, E combines J land and N land into J land and re-divided the J land into J land and O land on the same day.

3) On November 8, 1967, E changed the category of O land from forest to forest site, and received a new lot number called D (hereinafter “D land before partition”).

4) On June 15, 1968, E divided D’s land before subdivision into D’s land (hereinafter “instant land”), P’s land, and Q2.

Since then, P land and Q land were sold in lots over several times from around 1968 to around 1973, and a new house was built on each land.

B. The Plaintiffs’ acquisition of the instant land ownership 1) R purchased the instant land from E on May 1, 1989 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 5, 1989. Since R sold the instant land to S in sequence and completed the registration of ownership transfer. 2) The Plaintiffs purchased the instant land from C on March 2, 2007 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 29, 2007, respectively.

C. On the other hand, the Defendant occupied the instant land from around 1972 to the present day and offered the road packaging to the public for use as entry roads for neighboring residents.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 3 evidence, Eul’s 1, 3 through 13 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The defendant is a de facto controlling entity in providing the following general public with the form of a road by performing the necessary construction works for the land of this case.

arrow