건물명도
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B: (a) the real estate listed in Section 2 of the Schedule of Attached Real Estate;
B. Defendant C shall be attached hereto.
1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement of evidence Nos. 1 to 10 and evidence No. 1 to 10.
The plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association whose business area covers Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the "Urban Improvement Act"). The defendant B is the real estate in the list of the attached real estate in the above business area, and the defendant C is the owner and occupant of the real estate in attached
B. The Plaintiff received authorization from the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Office to establish an association on April 27, 2010, and authorization to implement a project on November 26, 2013, respectively, and on March 18, 2016, the Plaintiff’s management and disposal plan was approved and announced on March 24, 2016.
C. On October 28, 2016, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation on December 16, 2016, upon the Plaintiff’s request. Accordingly, the Plaintiff deposited the full amount of each of the compensation stipulated in the above ruling on December 7, 2016 with Defendant B as the principal depositee, and Defendant C as the principal depositee on December 9, 2016; and on March 3, 2017 with the Defendants as the principal deposit account, the Plaintiff deposited the settlement money, the cost of housing relocation, and the cost of movable property transfer.
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff is an implementer who has received the authorization of the management and disposal plan under the Urban Improvement Act, and the Defendants are the owners and occupants of the pertinent real estate in the rearrangement zone. If the management and disposal plan is authorized and publicly announced pursuant to Article 49(3) and (6) of the Urban Improvement Act, the use and profit of the right holders, such as the owner and lessee of the previous building, etc. is suspended. Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to deliver the pertinent real estate to the Plaintiff
B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants failed to receive compensation for losses, and the Plaintiff’s compensation for resettlement funds, relocation expenses, and director expenses until they are paid.