beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's claim extended in the trial is dismissed.
3...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 3, 2013, the Plaintiff purchased a lot of 654 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in the process of the public sale by the Korea Asset Management Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Asset Management Corporation”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 5, 2013.
B. On January 18, 199, the Yangyang City designated and publicly announced C as a small river pursuant to Article 3 (2) of the former Small River Maintenance Act (amended by Act No. 6000 of Aug. 31, 1999; hereinafter “Small River Maintenance Act”). The land of this case, the plaintiff-owned, is used to maintain the shape and function of the small river included in the above small river section.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6 evidence, Eul's 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant without any title occupies and uses the land of this case as the site for river facilities without title, obtains profits equivalent to the rent for the land of this case and thereby causes damages to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the rent for the land of this case to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
B. First, we examine whether the Defendant occupied and used the instant land without any title.
The fact that the land of this case is used in maintaining the shape and function of the above small river section included in C's small river section on January 18, 1999 is as seen earlier. As such, the above land was incorporated into a small river area as provided in subparagraphs 2 (a) and 1 of Article 2 of the former Small River Maintenance Act. Accordingly, the right to maintain and manage the above land, including the occupation and use of the above land, the alteration of its shape, and the alteration, alteration, or removal of river appurtenances, such as banks, shall belong to the management agency. Thus, the defendant who is the management agency cannot be deemed to possess and use the land
Supreme Court Decision 93Da46827 delivered on June 28, 1994