beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.01 2014재가단80

건물명도

Text

1. The Suwon District Court 2006Kadan25505, 2505, between the defendant (quasi-Appellant) and the conciliation intervenor (quasi-Appellant).

Reasons

1. 【Evidence of Recognition】1, B-2, C-1-1, 2, C-2, C-1, 2, C-4, and the purport of the whole pleadings;

A. On March 13, 2006, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming delivery of the building against the defendant and D, who asserted the lessee of the building in this case, and the conciliation intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the "participating"), on March 28, 2006, respectively, a lawsuit claiming delivery of the building, etc. against the independent party's intervention (U.S. District Court Decision 2006No2505) in the procedure of the public sale by the Korea Asset Management Corporation for the YA on January 26, 2006, on the ground that the plaintiff's application for intervention of the conciliation intervenor was the owner who paid the purchase price in full and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the building in this case.

Meanwhile, on April 3, 2006, F, the husband of the intervenor, applied for permission to act on behalf of the intervenor and received permission to act on behalf of the intervenor.

B. On June 15, 2006, the date for preparatory pleading implemented on June 15, 2006, the conciliation between the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Intervenor attended, and the said court permitted the Intervenor’s intervention in the conciliation procedure by submitting a lawsuit for a claim, such as the delivery of a building, etc. to the conciliation procedure. On June 15, 2006, “The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff the 39.795 square meters inboard connecting each point of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet by September 30, 2006, the amount of interest calculated in addition to the annual interest rate of 20 million won to the Plaintiff from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006.” The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the above amount of interest calculated in addition to the annual interest rate of 20% from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant protocol of mediation”) C.

The delivery of this case’s protocol to the Plaintiff on June 26, 2006, and June 2006, to the Defendant.