beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 25, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 60 million equivalent to the Plaintiff’s damages caused by the Defendant’s business obstruction (12 million in annual rent x 15 years), on the ground that the Defendant opened and used a road on the ground of approximately 15 years ago, the Plaintiff owned 13/15 shares on the land of 957 square meters prior to the Gyeongcheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, which owned the Plaintiff’s 13/15 shares, (1.2 million in annual rent x 15 years), and (2) on the ground that the Defendant obstructed the Plaintiff’s business obstruction for about five years, due to the Defendant’s business obstruction (12 million in annual net revenue x 5 years). After the pleadings in the instant case were closed on May 13, 2014, the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s judgment on May 20, 2014.
(C) The Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed (No. 2014Na31909) and the Plaintiff’s appeal was also dismissed (Supreme Court Decision 2014Da230924).
B. On August 8, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Category B Nos. 1 and 2 (including a serial number), and a substantial fact to this Court
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant interfered with the Plaintiff’s exercise of ownership for about 15 years by opening a road on the ground of 141 square meters on the land of 957 square meters, which was located in Gyeongcheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Daejeon-gun (hereinafter “instant land”). As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the annual rent of land for about 15 years (1.2 million won x 15 years).
In addition, even though the Plaintiff earned net profits of at least KRW 100,000 per month due to LPG gas sales business, the Plaintiff failed to conduct its business for five years due to the Defendant’s business obstruction, resulting in a loss equivalent to KRW 60 million (the annual net income of KRW 12 million x 5 years). Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 60 million due to the Defendant’s business obstruction.
(b) the board;