beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's main claim against the Korea Land and Housing Corporation.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion of the trial
A. On October 6, 2014, the Plaintiff’s primary assertion: (a) the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B, the father of Defendant B, to purchase the ownership of the housing site for migrants to be supplied from the implementer (hereinafter “instant sale right”); and (b) the Plaintiff paid KRW 180 million to D on the same day; (c) on August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff died; and (d) on August 31, 2015, the Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the inheritance agreement on the ownership of the housing unit of Pyeongtaek-si E, the 35.82 square meters in the roof and the 24.72 square meters in the soil section, which is the subject of the instant sale right, and on August 31, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer was completed due to the inheritance agreement.
Around May 2016, Defendant B was selected from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation as a person eligible for supply of a migrants site. On May 18, 2016, Defendant B and Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation concluded a sales contract with Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation to be supplied with a large of 219 square meters of a housing site (Concurrent use of a store) (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). As such, Defendant B and Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation, the heir of D, and Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation, a party to the instant sales contract, are obligated to implement the procedures for change of the purchaser’s name
B. Even if the Plaintiff’s conjunctive assertion that the sales contract of this case was null and void, the Plaintiff believed that the sales contract of this case was valid, and paid a total of KRW 95,560,000 and its interest amount of KRW 2,7,60,150 as stated in the sales contract of this case on behalf of Defendant B, and thus, the Defendants jointly and severally liable to refund the said KRW 98,320,150 (= interest of KRW 95,560,000 at 2,7,60,000) and delay damages to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
2. The reasoning of the judgment against the plaintiff's main claim is from 10 to 6.1 of the judgment of the court of first instance.