beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion
A. The plaintiff needs to remove urban gas pipelines installed by the defendant in the plaintiff's business area for the housing redevelopment improvement project.
B. Urban gas pipelines to be removed were already in durable years, and were not subject to compensation for losses, as they have been depreciated by 100%.
Nevertheless, on April 5, 2011, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff KRW 221,157,200 (compensation cost of KRW 179,836,00, construction cost of KRW 21,216,00, value-added tax of KRW 20,105,200) with the remaining value of the removal of urban gas pipelines.
C. In calculating the remaining value of the gas pipeline to be removed, the Defendant applied retroactively the changed durable years by arbitrarily changing the durable years, and only indicated only the depreciation amount and balance and did not inform the Plaintiff of the detailed depreciation details and the grounds therefor.
The Plaintiff believed that the Defendant’s computation of remaining value is reasonable in accordance with the “Standards for Calculation of Urban Gas Supply Cost”, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy’s guideline, and the Corporate Tax Act, and paid KRW 221,157,200 to the Defendant in May 201.
E. Even if the above payment is considered as payment by agreement between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, this agreement is an intrinsic error as to the nature of the object induced by the defendant (a mistake recognizing that it is not subject to compensation) and an important part of the legal act. The plaintiff revoked the above agreement during the lawsuit in this case.
F. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 186,131,549 and delay damages for the return of unjust enrichment.
2. First of all, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is based on the remaining value after calculating the remaining value of the gas pipeline according to the calculation standards for urban gas supply cost due to the removal of the urban gas pipeline to be paid to the Defendant, and the lifespan stipulated in the Corporate Tax Act, etc.