제3자이의
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for adding the following additional judgments to the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance between 2-B and 3 ( between 6-B and 13 of the judgment of first instance), and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The Plaintiffs, along with G, jointly inherited the instant building. As such, the Plaintiffs asserted that compulsory execution pursuant to the instant conciliation protocol, which the Defendant, with the exception of the Plaintiffs, against G, pursuant to the decision on alternative enforcement pursuant to the instant conciliation protocol, should be denied as it infringes on the Plaintiffs’ co-ownership.
If a third party asserts that he has ownership on the object of compulsory execution, or that he has a right entitled to prevent a transfer or delivery of the object, he may bring an action of demurrer against the creditor about such compulsory execution.
(Article 48(1) of the Civil Execution Act. Determination of the right to substitute enforcement is a commencement of compulsory execution, and the requirements for commencement of enforcement are met. However, it does not require examination as to whether the obligor had the power under the substantive law capable of performing the pertinent act. Thus, the reason that the building subject to removal is a resident of a building other than the obligor, regardless of whether the obligor owns or is to remove, does not obstruct the decision of the right to substitute execution. However, if the right of a third party is infringed due to alternative execution, the third party may prevent the alternative execution by his lawsuit against the third party.
If the ownership of a building constructed on another's land is infringed upon by the ownership of the building, the owner of the building shall be liable to remove the building.
(See Supreme Court Decision 87Meu257, 258 delivered on November 24, 1987). The decedent is on the land owned by another person.