임대료지급청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff purchased the instant store in the procedure of the auction of real estate rent D with the Busan District Court Branch Branch D with regard to the real estate stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant store”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 3, 2014.
B. On October 27, 2008, the Defendant occupied and used the building 1 to 5th (except the fifth floor store part), including the store in this case, in a lump sum from the comprehensive wind management delegated by the sectional owners of each shop of the building 9th above the ground of the 3rd floor underground located in Bupyeong-gu, Nowon-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “the building in this case”), which was located in the location of the store in this case, and occupied and used the building 1 to 5th floor (except the fifth floor store part), including the store in this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1-4 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the owner of the instant store. The Defendant, without complying with the Plaintiff’s demand to conclude the lease contract, occupied and used the instant store without title. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the monthly rent of the instant store as unjust enrichment return to the Plaintiff.
B. The defendant's argument that the store of this case is not independent in structure and use, and thus cannot be the object of sectional ownership. Thus, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim on the premise that the plaintiff acquired sectional ownership of the store of this case.
3. In order for part of one building to be the object of sectional ownership to be the object of sectional ownership, not only the part should be independent from other parts in the context of use, but also structural structure, and there can be differences in the strictness of structural independence in accordance with the situation of use or form of use. However, structural independence is mainly required due to the need to clarify the scope of physical control over the object which is the object of ownership.