(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.22 2017가단5200705

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 2018.11.22 2017가단5200705

부당이득금

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) KRW 22,693,000 and interest thereon shall be 15% per annum from October 17, 2018 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant and Nonparty C, a married couple, shared 1/2 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”). However, a compulsory auction for real estate auction was conducted as D with the Seoul Central District Court as to one-half shares in the title C among them, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 382,00,000 on November 29, 2016 and acquired ownership by paying the purchase price of KRW 382,00,000 as a successful bid in the said auction case.

B. The defendant is living together with his family in the real estate of this case until now, and independently occupies and uses the real estate of this case.

C. Monthly rent of KRW 2,063,00 is KRW 2,00 for the instant real estate for two years from November 29, 2016, and KRW 1,204,00 for the period from November 29, 2018.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, result of appraiser E’s appraisal of rent, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The co-owners of the judgment real estate may use and make profits from the entire real estate according to their respective shares, but unless a majority of the shares of co-owners have agreed on the specific method of use and profit-making, one can not exclusively occupy and use the entire real estate. If a part of the co-owners exclusively occupy and use the entire real estate, then the other co-owners shall be deemed to have made unjust enrichment corresponding to their shares if the use and profit-making is made to a person who has the share of the other co-owners but does not use it at all. Therefore, the obligation

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da17803 Decided October 11, 2002). According to the above facts, the Defendant, a co-owner and the Defendant exclusively occupies and uses the entire real estate of this case without agreement on the management method of the real estate of this case. As such, the Defendant gains unjust enrichment from the Plaintiff equivalent to the rent for 1/2 of the real estate of this case and thereby causes damage equivalent to the same amount.

As such, the defendant is the defendant.

참조판례

-대법원 2002. 10. 11. 선고 2000다17803 판결

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2020.07.17 2019나36572

-대전지방법원 2014.07.22 2013가단210586

-인천지방법원 2020.02.19 2018가단233593

-부산지방법원동부지원 2019.10.17 2019가합100669

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.04.28 2015가단8925