beta
Text
1. The defendant,
A. The sum of the money stated in the separate sheet of claim for unjust enrichment in attached Form 1 to the plaintiffs and the "period" period.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiffs owned or owned each land indicated in the “real estate” column of the “Real Estate Claim List” (hereinafter “each land of this case”), and the Defendant is a corporation that installs and manages high voltage processing transmission lines over the airspace of each land of this case.
B. The size of the steel tower installed in the area of 1,749 square meters in Jinju-si, Minju-si (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “each of the instant lines”), which is not the line of each of the instant lands (the area of the land corresponding to the vertical line within the scope of the horizontal range of three meters from both the outer lines of the transmission line) and the size of the steel tower installed in the area of 1,749 square meters in each of the instant lands are as listed in the corresponding entry.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 21, 22, 26, 27, 41, 48, 51, and 54, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 19, 23, 24, 24, 38, 45, 48, and 51; the result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal to appraiserN; the purport of the entire pleadings
2. As to the Defendant’s assertion of double lawsuit, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff L constituted double lawsuit, on the ground that the Plaintiff L passed the high voltage cable on his own land over the airspace, thereby restricting the use of the airspace above the airspace. Since a decision was made in lieu of the conciliation on March 24, 2014, it became final and conclusive as to the instant case, it constitutes double lawsuit.
According to the Defendant’s claim in this case’s assertion that there is no benefit of lawsuit based on res judicata under the previous lawsuit, the Plaintiff L was claiming the past and future unjust enrichment on the ground that the transmission line installed by the Defendant was limited to the use of the airspace above the land “2,869 square meters prior to O in Gyeong-gun in Seongbuk-gun” due to the transmission line installed by the Defendant in Seoul Central District Court No. 2012Ma46534, supra. In this case, the past and future unjust enrichment is recognized.