beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The grounds for this part of the facts are as follows, except for the part where it is clear that it is a clerical error in the judgment of the court of first instance or it is necessary to clarify the meaning thereof, and therefore, the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. The part which cited it as it is in accordance
A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part “2.58 billion won” in the part “2.58 billion won” in the third one of the judgment of the court of first instance
B. Of the judgment of the first instance, “No. 8, 2016.” part of the first instance judgment “No. 4, 2016.”
2. Judgment on the main claim
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff had a claim for construction cost of KRW 1 billion against its members. Of the instant real estate, the Plaintiff exercised the right of retention by concluding a contract for substantial loan with O and N, respectively. However, since the Defendant illegally deprived of the Plaintiff’s possession of the instant real estate through the court’s order of delivery, it is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff. Furthermore, the Defendant occupied the instant real estate without any legal cause, thereby gaining profit from the rent amount and causing damages equivalent to the Plaintiff’s amount of the said rent, and thus, the Plaintiff should return the amount equivalent to the rent amount to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
B. Specific review 1) Article 204(1) of the Civil Act provides that “When a possessor has been deprived of his possession, he may claim the return of the article and the compensation for damages.” Here, “when the possessor has been deprived of his possession” refers to the case where the possessor has de facto control, instead of his intention. However, in the auction procedure for real estate, the buyer may set up against the buyer the object of auction in case where the possessor has been ordered to deliver the article of auction to the possessor, and the possessor has been transferred the possession of the object of auction through the execution.