A project association for diesel reconstruction and reconstruction;

Defendant (Law Firm Mullu, Attorneys Lee Jong-young, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

August 21, 2013

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff money calculated by the ratio of KRW 868,200 per month from March 25, 2013 and from March 25, 2013 to the date on which the Defendant’s possession of real estate listed in the separate sheet is completed or the Plaintiff loses its ownership.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The decision is as follows (the plaintiff stated that "1,063,60 won" monthly from March 25, 201 to March 24, 2013, but it is a clerical error of "1,063,60 won".

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership preservation on March 25, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and the Defendant occupied the instant apartment after the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant apartment after acquiring it.

B. The Defendant asserted that the instant apartment was sold in lots on September 7, 2010, and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration of the instant apartment under the court No. 2012Gahap2973, but the Defendant lost the Defendant on October 30, 2012 on the ground that the sales contract in the name of the Defendant, which was concluded with respect to the instant apartment, constitutes a false declaration of agreement and becomes null and void (the Defendant appealed against the above judgment).

C. From March 25, 201 to March 24, 2013, monthly rent of the instant apartment is 25,526,400 won (monthly rent of KRW 1,063,60) in total, and monthly rent of KRW 868,200 from March 25, 2013 is 868,200.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 3, each entry of this case, the result of the commission of appraisal of rent to the non-party, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant gains profits without any legal ground by occupying and using the apartment of this case and thereby causes damages equivalent to the plaintiff, and the amount of profit from the occupation and use of the ordinary real estate shall be the amount equivalent to the rent of the real estate. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 25,526,40 per month from March 25, 201 to March 24, 2013 and KRW 25,526,40 per month from March 25, 2013 to March 24, 2013.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is the formal owner of the apartment of this case and has the duty to register the ownership of the unit to the buyer designated by Altien comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seijin-gu Co., Ltd.”), which is the contractor of the apartment of this case. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case premised on the premise that the Plaintiff is the true owner of the apartment of this case. However, even if the Plaintiff transferred the right to dispose of the apartment of this case to the non-party company by making payment in kind as part of the construction cost to the non-party company as part of the construction cost, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have transferred the right to use and profit from the apartment of this case as the owner. Thus, the Plaintiff may seek a return of unjust enrichment to the Defendant who occupies the real estate

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted as reasonable.

[Attachment Form omitted]

Judges Jeon Young-young