1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

A. The Sungnam-gu Mayor designated the Plaintiff as the implementer of the C-Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) to be implemented on the B 233,366 square meters in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu. The said designation was publicly announced.

B. On December 4, 2009, the Sungnam City approved the implementation plan of the instant rearrangement project on the same day, and publicly notified it on the same day, and on February 5, 2016, approved the amendment plan to the implementation plan of the instant rearrangement project as D public notice of Sungnam-si.

C. The Plaintiff established a management and disposal plan of the instant improvement project, and on November 7, 2016, the Sungnam City approved the said management and disposal plan as E publicly notified by Sungnam-si.

The Defendant leased the part indicating the Attached Form 2 (hereinafter “the part occupied by the Defendant”) among the buildings indicated in the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant building”) located within the instant rearrangement project zone, and operated a restaurant with the trade name “F” at that place, and closed on March 21, 2018.

E. The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the Central Land Expropriation Committee regarding the instant improvement project, and the Central Land Expropriation Committee accepted the instant building on February 8, 2018.

F. On March 27, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited the compensation for expropriation in accordance with the above expropriation ruling, and on March 28, 2018, acquired the ownership of the instant building.

[Reasons for Recognition] A’s absence of dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8, and Eul’s evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings is determined by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff seek unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent that the Defendant acquired by occupying and using the part occupied by the Defendant from the date following the date of commencement of confinement until August 16, 2018.

However, the benefit in return of unjust enrichment on the ground of benefit without any legal ground refers to the substantial benefit. If the lessee continuously occupies the leased building after the termination of the lease contract, but the lessee has no actual benefit due to the lack of use or profit in accordance with the original purpose of the lease contract, even though the lessee has continuously occupied the leased building.