손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On November 6, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to pay the remainder amount of KRW 368,000,000 to the Defendant at the time of the contract and to pay the Defendant the remainder of KRW 331,00,000 (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) and the remainder of KRW 331,00,000,000,000, out of KRW 417,000,00 and 53,000,000, out of KRW 146,000,000 on the Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do, the Defendant owned, and the two-story detached housing and D road (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
In order to enter the instant real estate, it is a major method to pass through part of 431 square meters (hereinafter “instant access road”) out of the 431 square meters, which is owned by Nonparty E, in order to enter the instant real estate.
On October 2014, Nonparty E: (a) laid up earth and sand and rock rocks on the said land, and installed a steel pole, steel pole, and wire network to interfere with the passage of the instant access road.
Nonparty G, H, I, J, and K, who used the access road of this case as the vehicle traffic lane, applied for a provisional injunction against interference with vehicle traffic under the jurisdiction of Suwon District Court 2014Kahap259 against Suwon District Court, and on January 21, 2015, E was decided to remove all obstacles, such as rocks, iron pole, steel pole, steel network, earth and pipe, etc. brought about the access road of this case from the above court.
E removed obstacles on the access road of this case at the time of the above decision.
On June 19, 2015, the above provisional disposition creditors and non-party L, M, N, andO filed a lawsuit to remove all obstacles, such as rocks and steel poles, installed on the access road of this case, with Suwon District Court Decision 2015No5622, May 19, 2015.
On April 26, 2016, the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the plaintiffs, and E appealed against the above judgment, and the present appellate trial is continuing.
On December 16, 2015, the Plaintiff continued legal disputes regarding access roads to the real estate of this case to the Defendant, and depending on the result of the dispute, there may be inconvenience in property depreciation and living conditions of the said real estate.