beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.11.03 2016나106757

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

Basic Facts

The network E is the defendant's father, the network F is the defendant's mother, and C is the defendant's mother as the latter wife of the network E.

On September 20, 1992, before the death of Dong E, donated to C a cement block structure, cement block structure, paper roof, and 39.69 square meters of housing (hereinafter “instant housing”). On September 26, 1992, the Daejeon District Court issued the Daejeon District Court’s registration office for grant of gift No. 10850 on September 26, 1992, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in C’s name.

On the ground of B 922 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter “instant land”), there were not only the instant land but also one obstacles, various trees and wells indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant obstacles”). However, the network E donated the instant housing to C, as seen above, and also donated the instant obstacles to C.

In implementing the “D Zone Improvement Project,” the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with C on June 14, 2013 to purchase the instant housing and obstacles at KRW 44,266,90 with a view to incorporating the instant land into the said project (hereinafter “instant sales contract”); and the Plaintiff all documents necessary for the transfer of ownership to the instant housing and obstacles in accordance with the instant sales contract.

On June 19, 2013, the Defendant filed an objection with the purport that the payment of compensation for the portion of an unauthorized building was suspended, and the Plaintiff, on November 13, 2013, notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the contract with the purport that “The Plaintiff shall not enter into a compensation agreement as a non-authorized building that does not own C, and thus, it shall re-consultation according to the court ruling after the termination of the instant contract.”

C With respect to the Plaintiff and the Defendant, C filed a claim against the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 44,266,90, which was the purchase price under the instant sales contract, and damages for delay, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit to confirm that the right to receive the said amount was C.