토지인도등
1. Of the Seo-gu 595 square meters in Busan, the Defendant has each of the following points: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1:
1. According to the facts that there is no dispute between the parties to the determination as to the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of claim, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 24, 2015 on the land of 595 square meters in Busan Seo-gu, Seo-gu as of May 18, 2015, and the Defendant owned a building (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land of 3.05 square meters in sequence of each point of 1, 2, 3.05 square meters in the attached drawing indication 1, 3.05 square meters in the land among the above land (hereinafter “instant land”).
According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the building of this case and deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserts that the land of this case was acquired legal superficies under the customary law, since there was no special agreement to remove the building in the case where the previous owner C obtained consent to use the land of this case and the landowner is changed.
Legal superficies under customary law are established when a land or a building belongs to the same owner, but the building or the land becomes different due to sale and purchase or for any other reason.
However, according to the defendant's assertion itself, it is recognized that the defendant newly constructed the building of this case on the land of this case, which is originally owned by another person, so there is no room for establishing legal superficies under customary law.
The defendant's above assertion is without merit.
B. The defendant's assertion of abuse of rights is not only a proper progress of the regional housing association project planned by the plaintiff at the time of acquiring the land of this case, but also a voluntary auction procedure for the land of this case is pending by the plaintiff's creditors. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for removal of buildings and delivery of land is an abuse of rights