logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2012.07.27 2010나47642
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The part against Defendant B in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. Defendant B Co., Ltd. is the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B, C, and D (hereinafter referred to as Defendant B, C, and D) are companies engaged in real estate development and sale business, planning real estate business, and planning real estate business, and the Plaintiff was in office as the head of the business of Defendant B.

B. On October 30, 2007, Defendant C purchased from the former owner the J-J Forest 28,196 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 30, 201 of the same year. Defendant C completed the provisional registration claim on April 11, 2008 as to the said forest.

C. On November 21, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant B with respect to the purchase price of KRW 330 square meters out of the forest of this case with regard to KRW 29 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On November 21, 2007, the Plaintiff paid each balance of KRW 20 million on the same day when it decided to substitute the prepaid KRW 9 million with the down payment.

① Defendant E (name before the opening of a name: L) is the current director and auditor of Defendant C, and Defendant D’s director; ② Defendant F is the director of Defendant D; ③ Defendant G is the representative director of Defendant D; ④ Defendant A is the director having the power of representation of Defendant C; and ⑤ Defendant I is the representative director of Defendant D.

E. The Defendant Company was collectively named as “M Group.”

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 through 3, Gap evidence 2-4, Gap evidence 7-2, Gap evidence 22-1 through 3, Gap evidence 38, 39, Gap evidence 46 and 58-1 through 14, Gap evidence 66-5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Defendant E, F, G, H, and I did not file an application for development permission to construct gas stations, rest areas, etc. in the forest of this case, and the competent authorities did not establish such development plan. In the absence of such fact, Defendant E, F, H, and I deceiving the Plaintiff as scheduled to construct gas stations, rest areas, etc. in the forest of this case.

arrow