Text
1. Of the plaintiffs' lawsuits against Defendant D, the ratio of KRW 60,588 per month from January 1, 2016 to January 15, 2017 by the plaintiffs' 60,58 won.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 28, 2006, Plaintiff A acquired the Plaintiff’s land with respect to 6/10 shares in relation to the 6/10 shares of Suwon-gu E, Busan and 416.5 square meters and F 680.2 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”), and Plaintiff B completed each registration of ownership transfer with respect to 4/10 shares among the instant site on the same day.
B. On March 21, 2005, the Defendants’ acquisition of the instant building 1) king General Land Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the instant site as indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant building”).
(2) On May 21, 2008, Defendant D completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to No. 1301 (No. 84.80m2) of the 13th floor of the instant building.
3) On October 7, 2016, Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to No. 704 of the 7th floor of the instant building (the steel reinforced concrete structure 84.97 square meters). On April 13, 2018, Defendant C transferred the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale as of April 13, 2018. (C) On February 2, 2009, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the owners of the instant building, including Defendant D, seeking the return of unjust enrichment due to the possession and use of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant lawsuit”), and this court rendered a judgment that accepted all the Plaintiffs’ claims on November 10, 2009.
2) The Defendants of the preceding case were dissatisfied with the above judgment and filed an appeal with Seoul High Court No. 2009Na119384. The Seoul High Court held that the monthly rent per square meter of the instant site from May 1, 2006 to April 30, 2007, 8,375 won, and 8,417 won from May 1, 2007 to April 30, 2009, and that the monthly rent per square meter of the instant site was KRW 8,250 from May 1, 2006 to June 30, 209, and that all of the Plaintiffs’ claims were accepted (hereinafter “prior judgment”).
The preceding judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
Of the preceding judgments, there are two defendants of the preceding case of defendant D's prior case.