beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The plaintiff's conjunctive to the defendants.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in light of the whole purport of the pleadings as to Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 8-1 through 3, and Gap evidence 9, and there is no counter-proof.
On March 9, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant land”). Nonparty G transferred the ownership transfer for each share of 2/3 of the instant land on March 27, 2009.
B. On November 13, 2009, Nonparty E completed the registration of ownership preservation for the three real estate listed in the attached list on the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”). On April 10, 2012, Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant building on the ground of compulsory sale by official auction on August 30, 201, and Nonparty D Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant building on April 10, 201.
C. The Plaintiff sought a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from April 10, 2012 to the non-party company as the case involving Chuncheon District Court 2014Da5701, 7523 (Intervention as Independent Party). On February 10, 2015, the non-party company rendered a judgment ordering the Plaintiff to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the annual rent of 23,285,850 won from April 10, 2012 to December 9, 2014, which was obtained from the possession and use of the instant land as the owner of the instant building, to the non-party company from April 10, 2012 to December 10, 2014, and to pay the amount equivalent to the annual rent of 20% from December 13, 2014 to the day of full payment, and from December 10, 2014 to the day of loss of ownership of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant unjust enrichment”).
Based on the judgment of unjust enrichment of this case, the Plaintiff is the Chuncheon District Court F.