logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.09.09 2016가단5369
공유물분할 등
Text

1. The plaintiff shall sell the real estate listed in the separate sheet to an auction and deduct the auction cost from the price.

Reasons

Basic Facts

In full view of the purport of Gap's entries and arguments, D is "No. 102 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet on November 21, 1980."

The fact that Eul purchased and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 4, 1980, D dies, and D's registration of ownership transfer on June 15, 201 regarding No. 102 was completed due to inheritance on December 25, 2010 for each of 1/3 shares in the plaintiff and Defendants, who are children of D on June 15, 201.

The judgment on the claim for partition of co-owned property is jointly owned by the plaintiff and the defendants, and there is no dispute between the parties that there was no agreement on the method of partition of co-owned property, and 102 cannot be divided in kind as one sectional ownership. The 102 co-owned property can not be divided in kind. The remaining amount after the auction was put up for auction upon the plaintiff's claim for partition of co-owned property, which was put up for auction and the auction expenses deducted from the auction expenses shall be divided in the way of distributing

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the statement No. 1 and No. 9 as to the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment and the entire pleadings, the Defendants may recognize the fact that they exclusively used No. 102 by leasing No. 102 after D’s death. Thus, the Defendants, without any legal cause, obtained profit equivalent to rent by using and gaining profit from the Plaintiff’s co-ownership from among No. 102, and thereby suffered loss equivalent to the same amount to the Plaintiff. Thus, the Defendants are obliged to return the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment equivalent to the above rent.

Furthermore, regarding the scope of the obligation to return unjust enrichment, according to the result of appraiser E’s appraisal of rent, the appropriate rent as to subparagraph 102 from January 1, 201 to June 30, 2016, upon the Plaintiff’s request, can be acknowledged as follows, and thereafter rent is confirmed as KRW 901,700.

Therefore, the Defendants from January 1, 201 to June 30, 2015.

arrow