logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.11.12 2020나46172
부당이득금
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 24, 2003, the Defendant acquired ownership by selling the instant land at a voluntary auction procedure (Seoul District Court E) for two parcels, other than D-do, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On February 19, 2009, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by selling the instant land in a voluntary auction procedure for the instant land (Seoul District Court F).

C. Of the instant land, the attached appraisal is located in the size of 63 square meters in part “bb” in the ship, which connects each point of the attached Table 1, 2, 10, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 13, 12, 12, 7, 8, 9, and 1, among the instant land (hereinafter “instant land subject to dispute”), with the metal structure and 39 square meters in each of the instant land on board, which is an unauthorized building, (hereinafter “the instant land without permission”). The instant land subject to dispute is provided for both the site and the use of the said building.

The sum of the rent from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009 of the instant dispute land is KRW 788,630, and the sum of rent from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 201 is KRW 1,568,950.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 4 (including the number of pages), the appraiser G in the first instance trial, the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 201, the Defendant occupied the instant land without permission, thereby gaining unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount of rent for the said land.

B. The defendant asserts that there was no ownership of the building without permission during the above period, and that the plaintiff's claim for return of unjust enrichment of this case cannot be accepted, since there was no lack of possession of the land without permission of this case after actually residing in the above building.

3. Determination

A. 1: (a) No. 4 was written in the return of unjust enrichment; (b) inquiry and reply to the head of Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City; and (c) appraiser G and Korea National Land Information Corporation.

arrow