logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2021.03.25 2019가단340150 (1)
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 14,438,520 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from December 3, 2019 to March 25, 2021.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On January 21, 1972, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of “93 square meters of land” (hereinafter “instant land”).

The present status of the above land was the aerial photography of May 1984, but was changed to the aerial photography of November 1984.

Although the land category was a site, the land category of the land ledger was changed to “road” on February 8, 1985, and on February 7, 2007, the land category of the entire certificate of registered matters (land) was changed to “road”.

The Defendant occupies and uses the instant land as a road site.

Land is the middle 3 kinds of land (12M to 15M).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unless the Defendant proves the source of possessory right to the land of this case, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff unfair benefit equivalent to the rent for the land, unless it proves the source of possessory right to the land of this case.

In light of the fact that the instant land asserted to waive exclusive and exclusive use and right to benefit has been used by the general public as a road at least from 1984, and the Plaintiff did not make compensation or objection to the Defendant during that period, and the property tax, etc. was not imposed on the said land, the Plaintiff should be deemed to have waived exclusive and exclusive use and right to benefit.

Judgment

The instant land has been used for a long period of time as a road, and the Plaintiff did not make compensation or raise an objection to the Defendant during that period, and the property tax, etc. was not imposed on the said land cannot be deemed to have waived exclusive, exclusive, and exclusive rights to use and benefit.

The Defendant, who asserted the defense of the completion of the statute of limitations for possession, has occupied the land in this case in a peaceful and public manner for at least 20 years, and acquired prescription.

Although it is difficult to find out documents about the procedure and compensation for the acquisition of public property of land which has long been incorporated into the road construction time, the plaintiff.

arrow