logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2017.11.24 2017가단50753
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on January 21, 1950 with respect to C-road 1,127 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) at Jeju-si, but the Plaintiff purchased the instant land and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 20, 2015.

B. The instant land was divided into Jeju-si E on December 30, 1972, and the land category was changed to a road on December 30, 1972, and the road (F) was constructed around that time.

C. From the time of the change of land category, the Defendant provided the instant land to the general public for traffic and passage, and occupied and managed it.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant provided the land of this case as a passage to the general public and acquired profits by occupying and using it, and thereby suffered losses to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff, the owner of the land of this case, is obligated to return unjust enrichment from such possession and use to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) As the Defendant’s assertion of prescriptive acquisition had maintained and occupied the instant land for a long period of time in peace, openly, and openly as to the road, the prescriptive acquisition period has expired. 2) From 1972 to 1972, the instant land in question was used as “F’s,” and at the time of F2th expansion project, the compensation was paid upon consultation on the extension portion to D, the owner of the instant land (G 817mm2 in Jeju, and D purchased the remaining land after the incorporation into the road expansion.

In addition, D had no objection to the use of the land of this case as a road.

Therefore, D shall be deemed to have given the right to access the land of this case to the general public free of charge, and there is no obligation to return unjust enrichment.

arrow