손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).
1. As to this part of the facts admitted, the corresponding part of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance (from 9:4 to 3:4) shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
However, according to the fourth decision of the first instance court, the following six to five types of “The plaintiff filed an appeal with the head of 2013du11536 and currently is still pending in the court of final appeal” shall be deemed as follows: “The plaintiff filed an appeal with the Supreme Court Decision 2013Du11536, but the Supreme Court has rendered a judgment against the plaintiff in whole by dismissing a part of the lawsuit on March 16, 2017, and by rendering a judgment dismissing the remaining appeal, the judgment against the plaintiff has become final and conclusive.” On the fourth decision of the first instance, the statement “B 15” shall be added to “the grounds for recognition.”
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. The primary claimant C is the owner of an unauthorized building on the land of this case who has lawfully filed an application for parcelling-out, but the Defendant did not grant the right to parcelling-out to the selected party C by classifying the selected party C as the object of cash liquidation, and did not pay the settlement money or compensation in accordance with the legal procedures of the relevant statutes.
Therefore, the defendant shall compensate for damages caused by the above illegal act to the Selection C.
B. Although the Plaintiff, as co-owner of the instant land, was in the same position as the other co-owner of the instant land, the Plaintiff had committed a tort to dispose of the apartment sold to H without granting the right to sell it to the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the defendant shall compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the above illegal act.
3. Determination
A. 1) The Defendant asserts that this part of the lawsuit is unlawful since the selected party C’s selection of the Plaintiff was not proven (this safety defense) and that this part of the lawsuit is proved in writing by the selected party (Articles 58 and 53 of the Civil Procedure Act), and Article 11-2 of the Civil Procedure Act.