logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2016.05.13 2014가합1174
부당이득금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 29, 199, the Defendant obtained approval of the project plan for constructing B apartment units (hereinafter “instant apartment units”) with four and three 360 households, a public constructed rental house, on the ground of the Gu-si, Gu-si, 12242.3 square meters (hereinafter “instant housing site”), and obtained approval for the use of the instant apartment units on March 12, 2002 after commencing the construction on May 29, 200.

B. On October 30, 2001, the Defendant announced the first recruitment of occupants of the apartment of this case. The period of the sale for sale in lots and the calculation basis and calculation method of the pre-sale conversion price stated in the notice at the time are as follows.

The period of conversion for sale: The method of calculating the conversion price for sale after 5 years from the 1st day of the month following the month in which the initial period of designation of occupancy ends: Article 3-3 [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Rule of the Rental Housing Act - The conversion price for sale in lots shall be the arithmetic mean of the construction cost and the appraised value at the time of the initial public announcement of recruitment of occupants - The construction cost shall be the self-interest of the housing price as at the time of the initial public announcement of recruitment of occupants - the housing cost of 13 square 4.060 square 32,296,296 28,9423,354, 354.290 33,249, 793, 4654. 393, 293, 296, 298, 308, 397, 398, 397, 1987;

C. The Defendant, from around the date of the above recruitment announcement, concluded a lease agreement with the lessee who responded to the above recruitment (102 Dong 105 is the lessee of 103 Dong 105, the lessee of 103 Dong 1305 is D, and the Plaintiff’s No. 88 E entered into a lease agreement with F as to No. 103 Dong 106. The Plaintiff’s remaining Plaintiffs except for No. 50 G, 119 H, and C, D, and F collectively referred to as “the lessee of this case” hereinafter) and the apartment of this case as indicated in the attached Table 2 “Dong” and “No. 105 among the apartment of this case, leased each of the relevant households for five years, which is the mandatory rental period.

arrow