건물명도
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B: The real estate listed in the Schedule No. 1;
B. Defendant C and D shall be the real estate listed in attached Table 1.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff is a project implementation district of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement Project”).
(2) On November 1, 2012, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation of the instant improvement project from the head of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 1, 2012, and on March 24, 2016, the head of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government approved and publicly notified the Plaintiff’s management and disposal plan.
3) All of the real estate listed in the separate sheet are located within the business territory of the instant rearrangement project. (4) Defendant B owned the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, while Defendant C (Defendant B’s wife) and Defendant D (Defendant B’s dead money and Defendant C’s starting money) occupy the portion (B) of the attached sheet No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 2, among the two real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, the portion of the real estate No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 32.70 square meters consecutively.
5) Defendant E owned and possessed real estate listed in the attached Table 3’s list, and Defendant F leased and possessed a portion of 10 square meters inboard (A) that connects each point listed in the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the first floor of the real estate listed in the attached Table 3’s list. 6) The Seoul Special Metropolitan City Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation on May 27, 2016 with respect to each real estate listed in the attached Table’s list as of July 15, 2016, and the Plaintiff deposited all the compensation prescribed in the said ruling of expropriation.
On July 13, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited 476,626,480 won (No. 3418 of this Court, 2016), Defendant E as a depositee (No. 312,379,330 won (No. 3523 of this Court, 2016), respectively, on July 14, 2016.
[Ground of Recognition] Defendant C, E, and F: The absence of dispute, each entry in Party A’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings
B. Paragraph 3 of Article 49 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents is determined.