대지사용승낙
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Basic Facts
On December 30, 1972, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the lands listed in the separate sheet 1, 3-8, and 10 (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).
On October 25, 1996, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract between C and C on the housing listed in paragraph 11 of the attached Table No. C owned by C, and on the land listed in the attached Table No. 1-10 of the attached Table No. 1 to 8 million won for an unauthorized livestock shed (nive yard) and one warehouse on the land listed in the attached Table No. 1 to 10 of the attached Table No. 3, and thereafter thereafter, the Plaintiff has operated the two stations by occupying the above housing, the two fraternity No. 9 (i.e., removal of one of the nine stations, and the present one remains after the removal of one of the nine stations).
The current status of eight dongs and warehouses (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff's building by combining the above dongs and warehouses) possessed by the Plaintiff shall be as shown in the attached Form 3.
On January 1, 2017, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the Plaintiff between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, setting the land specified in attached Table 1, among the Defendant’s land, as the lease period from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018, with the agreement that the Defendant leases the land as specified in attached Table 1, among the Defendant’s land, to the Plaintiff.
In addition, around April 2017, the defendant prepared and delivered to the plaintiff a written consent to land use for the approval of a temporary building for the plaintiff's building with respect to the land specified in Paragraph 1 of the attached Table among the defendant's land.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3-1-3-10, 4, 5, 5-1, 5-2, 6, 7-1-7-11, 8, 9-1, 9-2, and 15 each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings.
Plaintiff’s assertion
The plaintiff and the judgment are the cause of the claim in this case, and since 1996, the defendant allowed the plaintiff to use the defendant's land as the site for the plaintiff's building. The plaintiff concluded a land lease contract for part of the defendant's land in 2017, and also prepared a written consent for the use of land for the approval of a temporary building. Thus, the plaintiff removed the plaintiff's building, which is an unauthorized building, to the defendant.