beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) regarding the counterclaim shall be revoked, and that part shall be applicable to the revoked part.
Reasons
1. The scope of the judgment in this Court: (a) the Plaintiff pays the agreed amount to the Defendant in the principal lawsuit; (b) the Defendant, as a counterclaim, against the Plaintiff: (c) claims for damages due to the delay in moving in (8,556,337 won; (b) claims for restitution of unjust enrichment (2,646,128 won, such as delayed delay damages paid by the Defendant on June 4, 2007), ③ claims for damages in lieu of defect repairs (10,238,52 won; (c) claims for compensation in lieu of defect repairs (2,78,520,273 won in total), and (d) claims for consolation money (10,00,000,000 won in total); (2) claims for counterclaim and replacement of the living room; and (3) claims for counterclaim are dismissed.
In this regard, since only the plaintiff appealed against the plaintiff among the counterclaim, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the plaintiff's appeal among the part concerning the counterclaim of the judgment of the court of first instance.
2. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. Determination
A. (1) The defendant's claim for return of unjust enrichment (2,646,128 won, including the agreed delay damages) (1) was that the defendant did not move into the apartment of this case due to many defects in the apartment of this case and did not move into the apartment of this case on or around June 4, 2007. The plaintiff received 2,646,128 won, such as agreed delay damages, etc. from the defendant for the remainder of sale of this case from the defendant on the ground that 35 days have elapsed from the date of designation of occupancy, without any legal grounds, and suffered the same damages to the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to return 2,646,128 won, such as agreed delay damages, to the defendant as unjust enrichment.
(2) According to the written evidence Nos. 4 and 8, the Plaintiff constructed and sold the instant aggregate building.