logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.15 2014가단19439
부당이득금 반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 26, 2010, the Plaintiff was awarded 1/4 shares of each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”) in the real estate auction procedure.

B. The defendant occupies and manages each of the lands of this case as a road.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence A 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff, who is the owner of shares in each land of this case, gains from the possession and use of shares as unjust enrichment, barring special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The former owner of each land of this case renounced his exclusive right to use and benefit from the land of this case, and the Plaintiff acquired each share of the land of this case with knowledge of the circumstances in which such use and benefit is restricted at least in the auction procedure, and thus, it cannot be claimed to the Defendant for the return of unjust enrichment.

B. It is reasonable to view that the original owner of the land provided a part of the land as a road site without compensation to waive the exclusive and exclusive right to use the land, and accordingly, the person who specifically succeeded the ownership of the land through auction, sale, payment in substitutes, etc. after the residents got through the land without compensation and subsequently acquired the ownership of the land, as he/she is aware of such circumstances that it is at least the burden of restricting such use and profit-making. Therefore, the exclusive and exclusive right to use and profit-making on the part of the land provided as a road cannot be exercised. Therefore, even if a local government occupies and manages a part of the land as a road, it cannot be said that any damage has occurred to the person, and there is no benefit from the local government.

arrow