구분소유자 아닌 대지 공유자의 부당이득반환청구 - 대법원 2022. 8. 25. 선고 2017다257067 전원합의체 판결 -

The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of the decision in question(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Da257067 Decided August 25, 2022) and to clarify its meaning. The decision in question concluded as follows: a sectional owner who is entitled to a appropriate share of the land has the legal authority to use and make a profit according to the prescribed purpose and so a land co-owner who is not a sectional owner may file a claim for return of unjust enrichment resulting from the use and enjoyment of the land against a sectional owner who does not have a proper share of the land. To this end, the attitude of the previous Supreme Court’s opinion was first examined and summarized. In addition, the degree of conformity with the existing legal principles regarding under the Korean Civil Act to a relationship of land co-owner on which a condominium building was reviewed, and the appropriateness of the return of unjust enrichment was reviewed. The decision in question settled the previous opinion of the Supreme Court regarding the duty to return unjust enrichment of sectional owner against the land co-owner who is not a sectional owner and newly derived and used the concept of the concept ‘proper share in the land’. Accordingly, the meaning of proper share in the land was reviewed and the contents related to the problem of securing it were examined.