손해배상(기)
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 5, Gap's evidence 7, 8, Gap's evidence 9-1, and Gap's evidence 10-1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments);
A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a housing reconstruction project on June 12, 2003 from the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to implement a housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant project”) with respect to 150 buildings on a site of 405,782.40 square meters outside Songpa-gu, Songpa-gu, Seoul and six parcels pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”). A project implementation authorization was granted pursuant to Article 28 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents on April 26, 2008; a project implementation authorization was granted on December 26, 2013; and a management and disposal plan was authorized pursuant to Articles 48 and 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents on January 27, 2015.
B. The Defendants are co-owners who completed each registration of ownership transfer with respect to shares of 1/3 of the first floor No. 16 and 102 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E and one parcel belonging to the instant project site on December 26, 2001.
C. According to the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation, a union member shall leave the relevant house within the resettlement period determined and notified by the Plaintiff (Article 32(4)); and a union member shall be liable to compensate all damages incurred therefrom if the union member or tenant fails to leave the relevant house, thereby hindering the implementation of the project, such as removal of the existing house, and shall not raise an objection to the Plaintiff.
(Article 32, paragraph 5). (d)
1) Around July 24, 2012, the Plaintiff announced that the period from August 10, 2012 to January 31, 2013, the Plaintiff requested the members to move, etc. as the period of resettlement. The Defendants, who were members, did not withdraw from the instant real estate within the said period of resettlement. (ii) The Plaintiff was Seoul Eastern District Court.