beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On September 2005, when investing KRW 300 million in the Defendant from the Defendant, the Plaintiff was requested to make an investment by the Defendant by combining the said money and the land owned by his own Gyeonggi-gun D with the Plaintiff to purchase the said land and make it owned by the Plaintiff later. 2) On September 22, 2005, the Plaintiff invested KRW 300 million in the Defendant on September 22, 2005, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the said amount of shares of KRW 165,290/26,083 square meters in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).
3) However, the sales price of the instant land was 1.5 million won less than the above 300 million won. Accordingly, since the Defendant’s unjust enrichment, except the above sales price, constitutes unjust enrichment that the Defendant received from the Plaintiff without any legal cause, the Defendant is obligated to return the said money to the Plaintiff. Meanwhile, at the time of making a request for investment as above, the Defendant did not have any intent to invest in the said Gyeonggi-gun land and to engage in penta Development Project on the instant land. The Defendant had been aware of the fact that the sales price of the instant land was less than 30 million won, and was 30 million won by making a false statement to the Plaintiff as if the sales price of the instant land was 30 million won, this constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant, as a compensation for damages, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 190 million after deducting the purchase price of the land of this case from the above KRW 300 million, and the damages for delay.
(B) The plaintiff seems to have selected the assertion of unjust enrichment and tort.
On September 22, 2005, the plaintiff made a decision on the return of unjust enrichment 1 in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 9, comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings.