beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.04.20 2015가단24710

건물명도

Text

1. The Defendants ordered the Plaintiff to order the building indicated in the attached list.

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

3...

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s duty to specify the Defendants’ name has completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 25, 1979 on the building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”); the Defendants’ possession of the instant building can be acknowledged by adding to the whole purport of the pleadings, or there is no dispute between the parties.

Therefore, the Defendants, who possess the instant building, are obliged to order the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building, to do so, barring special circumstances.

2. As to the determination of the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted that the instant building was a property trusted to the Plaintiff on September 24, 1979 by the Plaintiff, Defendant C, and D, his father, and that the Plaintiff promised to transfer it to another type E, the owner of the relevant site, following D’s death, after consulting with other inheritors, such as the said Defendants, etc., and thus, the Plaintiff did not have a right to request the surrender of name based on ownership. However, even though the entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4 alone are insufficient to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.