logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.11.23 2016가단71856
부당이득금
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) KRW 11,459,615 as well as 5% per annum from September 10, 2016 to November 23, 2016;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 8, 2015, the Plaintiff solely inherited his/her property on August 3, 1955, following the Plaintiff’s death on the same day as that of the Plaintiff’s fleet B.

The judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive as the judgment of dismissal was rendered in the same court case No. 2014Na13326, the final and conclusive judgment of the Seoul Central District Court 2013Da113082 on the registration of transfer of ownership, the registration of cancellation of real estate of this case 2 and 3 real estate due to the division of consultation.

(2) The registration of initial ownership has been completed, respectively.

B. The land category of the instant real estate 1 and 2 has been indicated as the “building site” up to now, and the land category of the instant three real estate was changed from the “building site to the “road” around September 20, 1962.

C. The cadastral support map drawn up in the Japanese colonial era states that each real estate of this case is not included in the roads, but also included in the survey result map drawn up around December 21, 1960. The real estate of this case 1 and 2 real estate of this case and each of the real estate of this case is included in the roads.

After that, there was a road decision on each of the instant real estate 1 and 2, and thereafter, among the instant real estate and the instant 3 real estate, the appraisal of the attached sheet Nos. 3, 4, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, and 3 are assigned to City/Do C, and currently being used as packing.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment:

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is the managing body of the road where the dispute was incorporated among the real estate 1 and 2 of this case and the third real estate of this case, and the part of the dispute among the real estate of this case 1 and 2 of this case and the third real estate of this case are the roads for the general public.

arrow