1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the building of this case from Defendant B the building without permission (one name “E”; hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the Yeonsu-gu Incheon Forest Land D, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon from Defendant B for KRW 80 million.

On the other hand, Defendant C, as the seat of Defendant B, has written a statement and signed to the contract that he will assume any responsibility in this contract.

Accordingly, until October 14, 2014, the Plaintiff fully paid KRW 80 million to Defendant B, and paid KRW 1,577,600 (the tax base amount is KRW 15 million) on July 16, 2015 for reporting the acquisition of an unauthorized building.

B. Although the lawsuit against the landowner was filed for removal, there is no fact that the plaintiff obtained consent from the landowner in the purchase or possession of the building in this case.

In October 2014, land owners including F, became aware that the Plaintiff’s husband and wife occupied the building following Defendant B.

Accordingly, around November 2014, F et al. filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and G (the husband of the Plaintiff) seeking removal of the said building and transfer of the relevant land (this Court 2014Da73298) and was sentenced to a judgment for claimant on August 12, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(However, the enforcement procedure based on the above judgment seems not to have yet run). [The grounds for recognition are as follows: Gap 1 to 7, 10, 11, and Eul 3 (including evidence numbers)]

2. As to the primary claim, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants suffered damages to the Plaintiff, who was deceptiond, due to the Defendants’ failure to obtain the above purchase price and acquisition tax, by actively notifying the Defendants of the existence of the source of possessory right of the instant building, or as if a legitimate acquisition of ownership is possible, and thus, sought payment of KRW 81,577,60, and damages for delay therefrom, as compensation for damages caused by joint tort.

l.p. g., p.