beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.05.18 2016구합2961

주택재개발정비사업조합 조합원지위확인

Text

1. The plaintiff is the defendant's member.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 21, 2008, the defendant is the Housing Redevelopment Project Association which was authorized by the head of the Gu on January 21, 2008 for the purpose of implementing the Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project at the Busan Seo-gu C Office, Busan, and the building D located in Busan Seo-gu (hereinafter "the building of this case") is located within the project implementation district as an unauthorized building.

B. Article 9(1) of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides that “The members shall be the owners of the land or buildings within the project implementation district or the persons with superficies thereof,” and Article 9(2) provides that “The rights of ownership, superficies, etc. under the provisions of paragraph (1) refer to the rights prescribed by the Civil Act: Provided, That where a building is an unauthorized building as prescribed by the Ordinance of a City/Do, which is an existing unauthorized building as prescribed by the Act, and established by the Ordinance of a City/Do, recognizes it as its members, and Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Busan Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (including an illegal building) provides that “The existing unauthorized building means an unauthorized building (including an illegal building) arising

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion (1) The Plaintiff is the owner who purchased the instant building, which is an unauthorized building, from E around 1988, and is qualified for membership in accordance with the Defendant’s articles of incorporation.

(2) Not only unclear whether the Defendant Plaintiff is the owner of the instant building, but also lost ownership after around 2004 even if the Plaintiff owned the instant building.

B. (1) Whether the Plaintiff is the owner of the instant building and is the Defendant’s member or not, (2) the articles of incorporation of the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association grant the Plaintiff the qualification for membership to a person who owns an unauthorized building, separately from the owner of the land and building within the project implementation district

참조조문