beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.05.03 2017가단219178

건물철거 및 인도 등

Text

1. The defendant

(a)each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the land on the ground listed in the attached list;

Reasons

C. The Defendant’s customary statutory superficies was extinguished upon the Plaintiff’s claim on August 31, 2017, inasmuch as the instant lawsuit claiming the extinction of statutory superficies under customary law was filed on the grounds of delinquency in payment of rent for more than two years, and the duplicate of the complaint was served on the Defendant.

B. Therefore, since the Defendant lost legitimate possession of the instant land, it is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land, and deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff.

C. Also, from July 11, 2015 to the date of the Plaintiff’s loss of ownership or the date of the Defendant’s possession of the instant land, the Defendant obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly land rent and the land rent, and incurred damages to the Plaintiff equivalent to the same amount, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 283,990 per month, which is the amount equivalent to the monthly land rent, to the Plaintiff as the monthly land rent or unjust enrichment.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the monthly rent of KRW 7,218,842 from July 11, 2015 to August 23, 2017 [The 7,218,842 won [* 13 days (from July 11, 2015 to August 101, 2017)] of 25 months (from August 11, 2017 to August 23, 2017) (one day from August 2017)] of below KRW 13/31, as the Plaintiff seeks, the delivery of the complaint from September 1, 2017 to August 23, 2017; 5% per annum under the Civil Act until May 3, 2018; 15% per annum from the day following the date of full payment to the day of the Plaintiff’s delay payment; and 200% per annum from August 28, 2017 to 208.

(A) The Plaintiff is seeking the payment of the rent from May 24, 2015, but the above assertion is rejected as it is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition).3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim for removal and delivery among the Plaintiff’s claim is accepted, the portion of the claim is partially accepted, and the cost of the lawsuit is ordered to be borne by the Defendant, and it is limited to the part of the claim.