logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.04 2016가단5158098
부당이득금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. In fact, on September 30, 2002, the Defendant Company entered into a land sale contract with the Korea Land Corporation to purchase apartment houses with the area of exclusive use exceeding 85m2 square meters in Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant housing site”) on condition that the area of exclusive use exceeds 85m3,000, and paid in full the price of the instant housing site on December 30, 2004.

On December 15, 2003, the Defendant Company obtained the approval of the housing construction project plan for the construction of a private apartment on the instant housing site from Gwangju Metropolitan City, but revised the project plan and obtained the approval of the modification of the housing construction plan for the construction of a rental apartment on June 4, 2004.

After that, on December 30, 2004 from Gwangju Metropolitan City, Defendant Company obtained the approval for the revision of the housing construction project plan to re-issue the type of supply from the “lease” to the “lease.”

After that, on January 11, 2005, the defendant company started the construction of C apartment on the instant housing site (hereinafter referred to as the "lease apartment of this case"). On August 1, 2006, one year and six months after the commencement date of the above construction, the "rental housing" was finally constructed on August 1, 2006, and changed the business plan, and entered into a lease contract with the plaintiffs after the announcement of invitation of residents. The plaintiffs moved into the housing after obtaining approval for use on November 30, 2006.

Defendant Company entered into a contract for sale in lots with the selling household including the Plaintiffs from July 2011, and received the sale price.

【Legal basis for recognition】 Evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Evidence Nos. 10 through 12, Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

A. (i) The Plaintiffs asserted by the parties, and the instant leased apartment is Article 2 subparag. 1(c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Rental Housing Act.

The pre-sale conversion price for the publicly constructed rental house is to be calculated in accordance with attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Rules of the Rental Housing Act, but the defendant, despite the fact, is the Enforcement Decree of the Rental Housing Act.

arrow