logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.12.18 2014나42389
부당이득금반환
Text

1. Of the part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amount exceeds the amount ordered to be paid to the plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On December 26, 2001, the Minister of Construction and Transportation designated D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, and N Day as a planned area for housing site development under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act. Around that time, the project implementer designated the Defendant (the Korea National Housing Corporation and the Korea Land Corporation were newly incorporated as the Defendant on October 1, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply) as the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”), Gyeonggi-do, and Sungnam-si, and publicly notified the approval of the development plan on December 2003, and the approval of the implementation plan on December 30, 2004, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant housing site development project.” On October 2003, the Defendant decided to specially sell the site for detached houses within the instant housing site development project zone to the persons selected as the subjects of relocation measures as part of relocation measures for residents who have lost their means of living due to the expropriation of their housing, land, etc. as they were incorporated into the instant housing site development project zone. Accordingly, the Defendant publicly announced “the current status of the project for the housing site development project and guidance for compensation.”

The defendant supplied 230 square meters of one parcel to the original person subject to relocation measures at a level below 80% of the development cost (based on the amount calculated by deducting the installation cost of basic living facilities from the development cost), but publicly announced that the portion inevitably exceeds the above area due to the conditions for allocation shares should be supplied as appraisal price. On November 2006, the supply price of the previous residential site shall be reduced by up to 265 square meters as above, and the portion in excess shall be approved by the Minister of Construction and Transportation as to the housing site supply plan that includes the contents that the housing site is supplied as appraisal price.

On March 15, 2007, the Defendant, who was a person subject to relocation measures, entered into a sales contract with P on April 30, 2009 with a sale price of KRW 472,530,000, and the final payment date (four installments) for the sale price (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and the Plaintiff entered into P and November 21, 2008.

arrow