logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.11.02 2017나15592
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeal and the preliminary claims added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After filing an appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for adding the judgment on the conjunctive claim added by the plaintiffs in this court, and therefore, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Determination as to the conjunctive claim added by the plaintiffs in this Court

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion was ratified and delegated by the clan organization of this case, which is the real owner of the real property of this case, with respect to the filing of the lawsuit of this case. Thus, the defendant must return to the plaintiffs the purchase price equivalent to the shares of the plaintiffs claimed

B. (i) Some of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 9 and 11 are insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the plaintiffs received the right and prosecution for the filing of the instant lawsuit from the instant clan organizations, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Shebly take different opinions, even if they are based on the plaintiffs' assertion itself, the parties to the return of unjust enrichment are the clans of this case.

This is not allowed because the plaintiff is changed to the clan of this case and it constitutes a voluntary change of party.

Article 275 of the Civil Act). Members of the non-corporate association can use and profit from collective ownership in accordance with the articles of incorporation or other regulations, or participate in the resolution of a general meeting of members concerning the management and disposal of collective ownership property (Article 276 of the Civil Act). The sale price of each real estate, which is the property owned by the non-corporate association, belongs to collective ownership (Article 275 of the Civil Act).

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da57159 delivered on December 10, 1996). According to the above legal principles, the plaintiffs were ratified by the resolution of the clan general meeting of this case according to the plaintiffs' assertion on family affairs.

Even if the property in collective ownership is owned, each of the instant real estate.

arrow