(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.18 2015가합581129

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.18 2015가합581129

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor (hereinafter “Seoul East-dong Distribution Complex Development Project”) was to promote the project of the Seoul East-dong Distribution Complex Development Project (hereinafter “instant project”). On November 25, 2004, the Songpa-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Notice No. 2004-391, designated the project district of this case as the project district of this case. 2) The Plaintiff (the first name was the “EN Corporation,” but it was changed to the current name on September 1, 2016) (the first name was changed to the name as of November 10, 2005) was designated from the head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City as the project implementer of the instant project and obtained the approval of the implementation plan of the logistics complex development (hereinafter “approval of the instant project”).

3) From January 4, 2007 to December 201, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City changed the implementation plan for the instant project on five occasions. B. The Plaintiff purchased each land of this case from the Defendant on June 29, 2010 with the purchase price of KRW 3,884,983,00 on each land indicated in the separate sheet included in the instant project district, and paid the Defendant the full purchase price on June 30, 2010.

2) On November 24, 2010, the Plaintiff, on November 24, 2010, shall collectively read “each of the instant lands” in the total of the land and this land indicated in the separate sheet 639-13 square meters, Songpa-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, Seoul.

(C) On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the purchase price at KRW 482,949,33, and paid the purchase price in full to the Defendant on the same day. (c) The Plaintiff filed a claim for restitution of unjust enrichment with the Defendant on June 29, 2015, stating that “The land indicated in the attached list falls under public facilities irrespective of its current status, and thus ought to be reverted to the Plaintiff, who is the implementer of the instant project, shall be free of charge.” However, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the Plaintiff on each of the above land and received the purchase price

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.12 2016가합580116

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.30 2014가합581504

-서울행정법원 2017.03.10 2016구합60324

-서울행정법원 2018.10.05 2016구합72105

-서울행정법원 2020.01.10 2018구합81813