logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.15 2016가합577851
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 18, 2002, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Selection L shall jointly purchase shares of 1,322.5/4,419 shares from M in the area of 4,420 square meters in Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-do, and complete the registration of transfer of ownership on the same day.

Of the above land, the share of 1,774/4,419 shares in M was divided into 1,774 square meters before N on January 22, 2003, and the Plaintiffs shared 2,645 square meters before J. remaining after division (hereinafter “instant land”).

On September 17, 2014, the Selection L had completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 16, 2014, each of the 165/2,645 shares of the shares in the instant land, to the SelectionO and P.

B. Q created a reinforced concrete retaining wall with a height of 5,903 square meters, which was adjacent to the instant land, as an electric source housing complex. On around around 194, the attached appraisal map Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 2, c, 6, 7, a person, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, and 2 on the part connected each of the points in line with the instant land, which was in line with the said land, at least 30cm thick, length, 70 meters underground, 1.5 meters above ground, and 4 meters above ground was provided as a wall of the said electric source housing complex. After the division, K (hereinafter “instant road”) provided a private road within the electric source with concrete packaging.

C. Around October 2004, the land of the Gyeonggi-gun was divided into 511 square meters, U 446 square meters, V 35 square meters, V 36 square meters, V 66 square meters, X 66 square meters, 386 square meters prior to S, 336 square meters prior to Y, and the road of this case, etc.

The Plaintiff, the designated parties, and the remaining Defendants, other than Defendant C, owned one parcel of land and the share ownership of the road of this case within the previous housing complex through the partition of co-owned property and the subsequent transfer of ownership as shown in the following table.

[Attachment 1] Plaintiff 1,686/11,806’s shares in the land owned by the owner of K L 1,350/11,806’s L 1,350/11,8063’s shares in the land owned by the owner of K 168/11,806’s P 168/11,806’s shares in the land owned by the owner of K.

arrow