건물명도(인도)
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)
(a) remove the real estate listed in the annex 1 list;
B. Attached 2.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Facts of premise;
A. On April 5, 2018, the Plaintiff received from D (the father’s or the defendant’s father’s father) the registration of ownership transfer (the sale on April 5, 2018,) on April 5, 2018, with respect to the part of the attached Table 1 List (1) among the land listed in the attached Table 2 List (hereinafter referred to as “E land”) and the buildings listed in the attached Table 1 List (hereinafter referred to as “E building”).
[The part of subsection (2) of the E building is unregistered]. B.
The Plaintiff is the owner of a building listed in the attached Table 3 (hereinafter referred to as “F building”).
May 4, 2010 (Registration Fee for Ownership Transfer). (c)
The defendant occupies and uses E and F buildings.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 4, and the result of this court’s request for measurement and appraisal of the original branch of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. As to the cause of the claim 1) The fact that the Plaintiff is the owner of the land E, as seen earlier, is the fact that the Plaintiff was the owner of the land E. In addition, there is no dispute between the parties to the construction of the building and the original acquisition of the building at his own expense. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Defendant occupied and used the land of E, which is the site of the building, thereby hindering the Plaintiff’s exercise of the Plaintiff’s right to purchase the land of E. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to remove the building and deliver the land to the Plaintiff. (ii) As to the Defendant’s claim, the Defendant, who exercised the right to purchase the building, leased the land of E from D without a fixed period of KRW 1.5 million per the rent month, but if the lease agreement between D and the Plaintiff was terminated by the instant lawsuit, he asserts that the Plaintiff exercise the right to purchase the building
It is not sufficient to recognize that a lease contract between the defendant and D was concluded only with the statement of No. 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.