beta
Text
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,575,72 and KRW 5,546,806 from July 31, 2020, and KRW 28,916 from July 28, 202.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Of 32.4 square meters in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, the Plaintiff owned, the part of the instant site (hereinafter “instant site”) was actually used as a road since 2003, where the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the said site. The public sewerage managed by the Defendant prior to August 1, 2015 is laid underground.
B. The amount equivalent to the rent from August 1, 2015 to July 31, 2020 of the instant site portion is KRW 5,575,72.
The detailed details of the preceding shall be as follows:
The amount equivalent to the rental fee for a period of time from August 1, 2015 to July 31, 2016: (a) KRW 869,550 from August 1, 2016 to July 31, 2016 to July 31, 2017; (b) KRW 869,550 from August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2017; (c) KRW 1,191,330 from July 31, 2018 to July 31, 2018; (d) KRW 315,392 from August 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019; and (e) KRW 315,392 from July 1, 2019 to July 31, 2020; and (e) KRW 5,75,722 from each appraisal report; (e) the purport of each appraisal report;
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of recognition as to the claim for return of unjust benefits, the defendant, a local government, is obligated to return the benefits accrued therefrom to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances, since the defendant, a local government, is occupying and using public sewerage in the underground part of the site of this case owned by the plaintiff (in relation to the scope of acquisition of unjust benefits to be returned, the time when the part of the site of this case was actually used as a road and the aftermath of the time when public sewerage was laid underground. However, the plaintiff's use of the site of this case at the time when the public sewerage was laid open for the plaintiff's use of the land of this case is a road, so the amount of the rent calculated based on the fact that the use of the land of this case was a road, and thus, the defendant has been actually used as a public service by neighboring residents from 1979 to the date of this case. Accordingly, the non-party F, the former owner of the site of this case, renounced exclusive exclusive rights to use the site of this case, and the plaintiff knew such circumstances.