1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

가. 원고는 B사업지구 보금자리주택사업의 시행자로서 2013. 9. 16.경까지 위 사업지구 내 토지인 시흥시 C 대 330㎡(이하 ‘이 사건 토지’라 한다) 및 그 지상 일반철골조 경량판넬잇기지붕 건물(이하 ‘이 사건 건물’이라 한다)의 소유자였던 피고에게 이 사건 토지 및 건물에 관한 보상을 완료하였다.

B. On December 6, 2013, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant compensation for obstacles to the instant building, etc., and the Defendant still has not left the instant building.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 6-1, 2, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment or occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the defendant at least has the duty to deliver the instant building site, etc. among the instant land to the plaintiff by December 6, 2013. Since the defendant did not perform his/her duty to deliver the said building site, etc., barring any special circumstance, the defendant is liable to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff or compensate the damage therefrom.

B. 1) The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff did not establish relocation measures pursuant to Article 78-2 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects and Article 41-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act; (b) the Defendant’s occupation of the instant land does not constitute unjust enrichment or tort; (c) whether the Defendant established a plan for relocation measures pursuant to Article 78-2 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects and Article 41-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

Article 78-2 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects is a project implementer.