beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendants and D’s sales contract 1) The Defendants are two parcels, not less than 1,576m2 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from D around June 2015, 201, the E-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do.
2) The sales contract to acquire the sales price and business rights in KRW 1.3 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
(2) The Defendants paid a total of KRW 600 million to D around June 19, 2015, and August 2015, and completed each registration of ownership transfer concerning the F land in the name of the Defendant C Co., Ltd. with respect to the F land in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Inc. on September 23, 2015.
B. (1) On October 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the transfer and acquisition of claims from D to acquire the unpaid claim KRW 700 million under the instant sales contract. (2) On November 9, 2015, D sent the notice of the transfer of claims to the Plaintiff by content-certified mail that the Defendants transferred the unpaid claim KRW 700 million under the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff.
C. The Defendants filed a claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against D (Revocation of the instant sales contract) and rejected the Defendants’ application for permission and refusal on November 27, 2015, filed an application for alteration of the current state of State-designated cultural heritage with the number of 509 households and the height of the building 47.9m for the change of the current state of H members granted to the Support Agency on November 27, 2015. However, it was rejected on the grounds that there is a high risk of undermining the historical and cultural environment on December 16, 2015. Thereafter, the Defendants filed an application for restitution of unjust enrichment against D, around February 26, 2016 and around May 26, 2016, around June 20, 2016, around five times, 2016, and around August 2016, 2016, revoked the Defendants’ declaration of intent to return the current state of State-designated cultural heritage asset to the Defendants.