beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.08.23 2018나42399

토지인도

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. By means of the reduction of claims in the trial.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On September 2, 2015, the Plaintiff is an urban planning facility project (title of the project: J road construction works; hereinafter “instant project”) with the project zone located in Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Seo-gu, Busan.

To do so, after obtaining authorization of an implementation plan pursuant to Article 88 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and publicly announcing the above implementation plan pursuant to Article 91 of the same Act (Notice K. 2 of Busan Metropolitan City Seo-gu), E acquired the ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet in the instant project area around 1970, and the Defendant is the lessee who leased the building listed in paragraph 2 of the separate sheet from E.

3) The building indicated in paragraph (2) of the attached list is registered as a wooden tank located in the Seo-gu Q and O, Seo-gu, Busan as a copy of the register, which is 10 square meters of 10 square meters of 10 square meters of 44.61 square meters of 7 square meters of 34.61 square meters of 7 square meters of 20,000,000. However, since several times, each land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list and each land listed in paragraph (2) of the attached list were located over five lots of land, such as Q andO land in Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, and the entire three floors of the building was 3rd floor and its structure was 92.76 square meters of 1st floor, 2nd floor, and part of 92.31 square meters of 31 square meters of 30 square meters of 35.94 square meters of 20,000 square meters of 35.4).

5. On June 20, 2016, the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling to accept each real estate, etc. listed in the separate sheet on August 12, 2016. Among them, the buildings listed in paragraph 2 of the separate sheet were accepted based on the current status, and the plaintiff was determined by the above expropriation ruling.