(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.08 2016가단5310902

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.08 2016가단5310902

부당이득금

Text

1. On July 25, 2012, with respect to the Plaintiff’s Defendant, the obligation to pay rent according to the loan agreement for State property owned by the Plaintiff on February 3, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A list on April 26, 2005 by the Plaintiff from CBD Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SBD”)

2. The sales contract of this case was concluded as follows (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) by purchasing the building without permission as indicated below (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) at KRW 89 million.

- The sale and purchase contract for real estate to be removed - the seller shall transfer the real estate to the buyer and the unauthorized house to the buyer.

- The buyer owns only the apartment right granted at the time of consultation on the compensation for real estate, and the seller receives the compensation for real estate.

- This Agreement shall be drafted for urban planning by the end of the year 2006, and shall be immediately replaced or refunded in full at the time of the delay by the buyer.

B. On April 26, 2005, the date of the contract, the Plaintiff paid 89 million won to the non-party company. The Plaintiff was transferred from the non-party company to the Plaintiff the name of the owner on the ledger of the non-permission building in this case.

C. In around 2006, the Plaintiff confirmed the non-party company upon receipt of a notice from the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office to pay indemnity, which is a fee for the use of state-owned land, but did not hear and pay the response from the non-party company to the effect that “the compensation does not be paid as at the time of removal.” After receiving a notice for payment of indemnity and a demand note from the Defendant, the Plaintiff again asked the non-party company, but did not pay the above indemnity, etc...

Since February 2011, when the Plaintiff was unable to communicate with Nonparty Company and received demand for payment continuously from the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into a State-owned property loan agreement with the Defendant on July 27, 2012 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) and entered into the agreement with the Defendant on July 27, 2012, and attached list with overdue indemnity and loan charges to the Defendant.

1. Each of the money recorded in the column of the date of payment was paid.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.01 2015가단112670

-서울행정법원 2017.11.21 2017구단71669

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.21 2016가단5164772

-서울행정법원 2017.10.19 2017구합65180

-대전지방법원 2016.05.12 2015구합102735