건물명도(인도)
1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.
2. The costs of litigation incurred between the Plaintiff and the Defendant are assessed.
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) the ground for the claim; (b) the commencement date of the expropriation was decided on October 20, 2017; and (c) the fact that the plaintiff deposited compensation to the defendant on October 18, 2017 by the expropriation ruling.
The Defendant, as a person subject to cash settlement, has no obligation to deliver until he/she pays housing relocation expenses, resettlement funds, and directors' expenses. However, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since it cannot be acknowledged that the relationship between the obligation to pay housing relocation expenses, director expenses, etc. to the resident of the residential building, and the obligation to deliver real estate borne by the occupant of the residential building who has received compensation for expropriation is not in a simultaneous performance relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da40643, Feb. 15, 2017).
In addition, the defendant is undergoing the administrative litigation seeking the reduction of the late payment additional charges filed by the plaintiff against 40% of the late payment additional charges due to the adjudication, and thus disputes are raised to the effect that there is no obligation to deliver part of the compensation for losses (including late payment additional charges) until the completion of the lawsuit, but the plaintiff who is a project operator is dissatisfied with part of the compensation for adjudication (including late payment additional charges) by the Land Tribunal, the amount of objection shall be separately deposited (Article 40(2) of the Public Works Act), and the fact that the defendant is unable to receive the compensation until the procedure for objection is completed (Article 40(4) of the Public Works Act) is the provision of the Public Works Act (Article 40(4). Therefore, the failure of the defendant to receive the additional charges among the compensation deposited by the defendant
Ultimately, as long as the Plaintiff deposited the compensation and additional charges for delay following the adjudication, the Defendant is the building of this case by the commencement date of expropriation in law ( October 20, 2017).