logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.09.01 2014가단39741
부당이득금
Text

The defendant shall own the plaintiff's ownership as to the real estate stated in the attached Table from April 1, 2015 and from April 1, 2015.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

Attached Form

On April 10, 1995, the provisional attachment registration for Korea Development Bank Co., Ltd. was completed on April 10, 1995, and the attachment registration for the right holder Kimpo-si on April 7, 1998 was completed on April 7, 1998.

On March 13, 2003, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation on February 20, 2003 (hereinafter “the registration of transfer of ownership”). On March 26, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of public sale on March 19, 2004 with respect to the above C’s co-ownership share (hereinafter “instant real estate share”), and the co-ownership share in the registration of transfer of ownership was changed to 3/4 by the registration of correction on the same day.

The Defendant uses the instant land as the site and access roads of community halls and low temperature warehouses newly constructed around 1997 (hereinafter “instant building”).

The amount equivalent to the rent for the instant real estate share from March 19, 2004 to March 30, 2015 is KRW 11,688,360, and the monthly rent from March 30, 2005 is presumed to be the same even after March 30, 2005, barring any special circumstance.

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, the statements and images of Gap 1 through 7, the inquiry and re-examination of the D pages of this court, the majority of co-owners of the judgment as to the cause of claim as a whole, did not consult with the co-owners about the method of management of the jointly owned property in advance with the co-owners

A majority of co-owners are entitled to independently decide matters concerning the management of the co-owned property, and therefore a majority of co-owners are entitled to exclusively use and benefit from one part of the co-owned property. However, the share arising therefrom is generated, but the minority right holders suffering from damages due to the failure to use and benefit from the specific part are entitled to unjust enrichment equivalent to the share.

(c).

arrow