beta
(영문) 서울고등법원(춘천) 2017.11.22 2017나693

토지

Text

1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this case by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Defendant B did not consent to the use of land within the scope necessary for building permission as to the land in this case, and Defendant C did not succeed to the consent. First, as to whether Defendant B consented to the use of land in this case, health zone was divided into the land in which the Plaintiff purchased part of the land in this case before division, and purchase only the part of the land in this case without the agreement of the seller, such as the seller's consent to the use of the land in this case. ② Furthermore, in light of the Plaintiff's purchase of part of the road in this case, it appears that the Plaintiff agreed to the use of land in this case, and ③ Defendant B did not purchase part of the land in this case with the consent from the Plaintiff at the time of the purchase, on the premise that Defendant B purchased part of the land in this case with the consent to use the land in this case, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff purchased the land in this case without the consent, and ④ Defendant B purchased part of the land in this case's neighboring concrete in view of the premise that the purchase price in this case was reasonable within 200 million won.