건물등철거
1. The part of the plaintiff (Appointed Party)'s request for eviction against the defendants is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff (appointed party).
1. Determination of rejection shall be made ex officio, and determination shall be made as to whether the remainder of the lawsuit in this case, excluding the part requesting withdrawal, is legitimate
A conciliation is established by entering the matters agreed between the parties in the protocol. Since the conciliation protocol has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, such as a protocol of judicial conciliation, if a party to whom conciliation has become final and conclusive files a lawsuit against the other party to the lawsuit identical to that of the previous suit for which conciliation has
(2) The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed party filed a lawsuit against the Defendants on April 14, 2006 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006; 2006Da78732, Apr. 26, 2007). However, according to each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed party filed a lawsuit against the Defendants against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed party A and to remove the building of this case on the ground of the above land, and on November 21, 2013, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed party E sell the land of this case to the Defendant at KRW 110 million.
2. Defendant B shall pay the purchase price specified in paragraph (1) to Plaintiff (Appointed Party), 65 million won to December 31, 2013, and 65 million won to January 31, 2014, respectively. If Defendant B delays payment in installments, the amount calculated at the rate of two million won per month from February 1, 2014 to the date of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed Party E’s loss of ownership, and the amount calculated at the rate of two million won per month to Plaintiff (Appointed Party).
3. The plaintiff (Appointed Party) A and the appointed party E waive each of the claims of this case against the defendants.
‘The fact that the adjustment has been completed' is recognized.
Therefore, the claim for the transfer of land and the removal of a building, which are the same content as that of the previous suit for which mediation was completed by the plaintiffs, are unlawful.
2. The plaintiffs' judgment as to the dismissed part against the defendants.