logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.26 2013가단39849
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) The rate of 16,573,086 won and 20% per annum from June 22, 2014 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Division and location (1) The land division and location (5,037 square meters in B miscellaneous land in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City was divided into ① B miscellaneous land 2,724 square meters and C-D land on January 18, 1971; ② among them, the land in D was divided into E-F land on March 13, 1971, E-F land on June 26, 1974, G, and H land on June 14, 1980; ③ the said B miscellaneous land was 335 square meters in B miscellaneous land (hereinafter “instant land”) and I-J land on February 14, 1980.

(2) As shown in the separate sheet, the instant land is adjacent to the land divided into the same mother land, such as C, K, L, M, N,O, P, and F, and is adjacent to other land, such as Q forest, R forest, and land adjacent to the lower end.

B. (1) The Plaintiff acquired the ownership of 1/2 of the instant land on July 18, 1989.

(2) Of the instant land, the Defendant is in possession of a portion of 198 square meters in the attached land as a road, and a portion of 25 square meters in the cream section as a public parking lot.

The Defendant laid underground water supply pipes (before the implementation of the local self-government system) on the ground of the instant land, and part of underground were leased to Seoul Urban Gas and received occupancy charges from Seoul Urban Gas, and refunded the occupancy charges on November 5, 2013 while the instant case continues.

(3) Of the instant land, the rent on a road with a total of 223 square meters of the said land, which is the following:

1) From February 14, 2008 to May 2, 2014: A total of 33,146,172 won) on and after May 3, 2014: KRW 475,00 per month (including the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the fact that there is no dispute over the facts, the result of the appraiser’s survey and appraisal by the appraiser S, the result of the appraiser’s appraisal of rent, the result of the appraiser’s appraisal of rent, and the purport of all pleadings)

2. Determination:

A. According to the Defendant’s obligation to return unjust enrichment (1) the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from its possession to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land, barring special circumstances.

(2) 피고의 주장 ㈎ 피고는, 이 사건 토지가 분할 당시의 소유자에 의하여 인접한 다른...

arrow