logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.02.16 2013나50979
부당이득금반환
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1,309,135 won and its related expenses on November 201.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 17, 2004, the Plaintiff donated the Seoyang-gu B 2,413 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) from Goyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu (hereinafter “instant land”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 22, 2004.

B. Around 2001, the Defendant installed concrete waterway, waterway, bank slope, etc. in order to prevent excellent damage in the urban districts located in Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Yangyang-gu. Accordingly, the Defendant installed concrete waterway, waterway, and bank slope in the order of 163m2, 47, 67, 67, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 47, 48, 59, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 555, 69, 67, 47, 68, 48, 47, and 47, each of which was connected to the ground section of the instant land in line with each of the above points, and each of which was connected to the ground section of the instant land in line with 7, 61, 62, 558, 564, 565, 569, 47.

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “facilities of this case”).

The sum of the rent from January 1, 2007 to November 17, 2011 (=242,900 won = 264,50 won KRW 267,500 won (264,500 won x 321/365)), and the rent from November 18, 201 to May 14, 201 is the aggregate of KRW 145,905 won [285,90-251,435 won)] from November 17, 201, and the rent from May 15, 201 to 321/365]; and the rent from November 18, 201 to May 14, 201 is the sum of KRW 145,905 won [285,90-251,435 won]; (30 won from May 15, 2012 to the present date];

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute; entries and images of Gap evidence 1 to 3; the result of the survey and appraisal by the appraiser E of the first instance court; the result of the appraisal by the appraiser F of the party instance trial; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, the defendant removed the facility of this case from the plaintiff seeking a claim based on ownership and a compensation for damages, and deliver the above part of land which is occupied by the existence of the facility of this case to the plaintiff, and after the defendant occupied the above part of the land of this case owned by the plaintiff, Y, and so on, the plaintiff sought on January 1, 2007.

arrow