beta
Text
1. Defendant B: (a) KRW 15,668,240 for Defendant B; and (b) Defendant C jointly with Defendant B for KRW 1,748,150 for each of the said money and each of the said money.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant officetels”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 27, 2014 for 804 among them.
B. Defendant B occupied and used each of the instant officetels before the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant officetels, and leased No. 804 among them to Defendant C. The Defendants removed from each of the instant officetels on August 11, 2016 during the instant lawsuit.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 15 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a legitimate owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant officetels. Since the Defendants occupied and used each of the instant officetels without any title, the Plaintiff is obligated to refund the amount equivalent to the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment from the time when the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of each of the instant officetels to the time when the Defendants left the office.
B. Defendant B’s assertion is a legitimate holder of possession and use of each of the instant officetels in lieu of the sales price of each of the instant officetels as a claim for damages against E (F, Inc., Ltd., a corporation in B; hereinafter referred to as “F”) which has been running an officetel and a new apartment construction project on each of the instant officetels sites.
F The actual G of the F, after constructing a building on each of the instant officetels sites, had the instant officetels intentionally go beyond the auction procedure, and had H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) in fact identical with F (hereinafter “H”) each of the instant officetels.