건물명도
1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the plaintiff A shall be revoked.
2. The defendant shall provide the plaintiff A with 2 real estate listed in the attached list.
기초 사실 이 법원이 이 부분에 관하여 설시할 이유는 제1심 판결문 제6면 3행의 “선내 ㈓ 부분 29.04㎡(이하 ‘306호’라 한다) 및 202호, 401호를 각 점유하고 있다.”를 “선내 ㈓ 부분 29.04㎡(이하 ‘306호’라 한다)를 각 점유하고 있다가 제1심 판결의 가집행 선고에 기하여 원고 A에게 이 사건 제2건물의 201호, 203호, 204호, 205호, 206호, 301호, 302호, 303호, 304호, 306호를 각 인도하고, 나머지 각 호실을 각 점유하고 있다.”로, 제1심 판결문 제6면 6행, 9행의 “이 법원의”를 “제1심 법원의”로 고치는 것 이외에는 제1심 판결문의 이유 기재와 같으므로 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 의하여 이를 그대로 인용한다.
Opinions of the Parties
A. Under the construction contract of this case, Plaintiff A and Plaintiff 1 agreed to pay the remainder within two months from the completion loan, lease, sale, etc. after completion of the building. At present, each of the buildings of this case was not completed (approval for use) due to defective construction parts and defects. Thus, the Defendant’s right of retention for the remainder claim under the construction contract of this case is not established. 2) It cannot be deemed that the Defendant occupied the No. 203, No. 204, No. 301, 302, and 303 of the building of this case before the entry registration of this case. In the case of the building of this case No. 2, even if the Defendant occupied No. 401 of the building of this case at the time of the entry registration of this case, even if the Defendant occupied the building No. 2 of this case at the time of the entry registration of this case, since the right of retention was not terminated by the Defendant’s right of retention for lease or loan of use after reporting it to V.
3. The claims for the remainder of the construction of each of the instant buildings shall be satisfied.