logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.16 2013가합505015
부당이득금
Text

Plaintiff

A, B, and C shall be dismissed respectively.

Attached Form

3. The sequence 1 to 3 of the claim amount and the quoted amount list.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The remaining Defendants except Defendant SP Corporation, implemented by the Defendants, are local governments, and the head of the Si/Gun/Gu is the project implementer, and attached Form 1.

4. Although the relevant public works specified in the detailed list of implementation of the public works by the defendant were implemented, in cases where the contents thereof refer to the head of a local government who is the project implementer, only the relevant defendant, who is a local government, for convenience.

Attached Form

4. Each of the public works in the corresponding column of the performance list of the public works by Defendant (hereinafter “each of the public works in this case”) provided real estate owned by each of the parties.

B. On December 6, 2002, Defendant SAS Corporation newly constructed and executed a housing site development project to lease and sell housing units (hereinafter “N zone apartment units”) with a total of 5,592 households of national housing units of 5,592 households of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government LM large 600,323 square meters (hereinafter “N zone”) designated as a planned area for housing development (approval of the housing site development plan on September 27, 2003) (hereinafter “N zone”).

C. The Defendants, from around 2003, received an application from the Plaintiffs falling under Article 5 of the Rules on Special Supply of National Housing from the Seoul Special Supply to those who provided real estate in each of the instant public services, to specially supply the NE apartment in accordance with the “Rules on Special Supply of National Housing to the Demolition Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Rules 3305, Seoul Special Supply Rules; hereinafter the “Rules on Special Supply”).

The Plaintiffs, from around 2007 to 2008, on Defendant E. E.S. Corporation and N district apartments entrusted by the Defendants with the special supply of national housing.

3. After entering into a sales contract with the same content as that stated in the claim amount and the quotation amount sheet (hereinafter “each sales contract of this case”), the sales contract of this case shall be concluded, and the sales price pursuant to the relevant sales contract shall be paid in full and the apartment shall be sold in lots.

arrow