beta
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.11.19 2015가단1139

지료

Text

1. The Defendants each amounting to KRW 20,344,50 and each of them to KRW 15% per annum from September 17, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff becomes a sole owner of the entire land of this case by completing the transfer registration of ownership on October 19, 2009 under the receipt of No. 44109 on October 19, 2009, with respect to the share of 74/296 square meters among D major 296 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On the instant land, there is a building on the ground of 1st 99.72 square meters and 2nd 99.72 square meters and 2nd 9.72 square meters on the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”).

(The approval date of use shall be October 7, 1983).

The Plaintiff is each owner of No. 102 and No. 202 of the first floor among the instant building.

Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer as to No. 101 of the first floor among the instant building (hereinafter “instant No. 101”) with the head of Dong Office No. 56036, Nov. 2, 2011.

(no registration of site ownership shall be made).

Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer as to No. 201 of the second floor among the instant building (hereinafter “instant No. 201”) with the macro-registration office No. 56037, Nov. 2, 2011.

(F) The Defendants acquired the ownership of each of the instant units 101 and 201 from November 2, 2011 to November 1, 2014, respectively 14,526,200 won for each of the above units, and for each of the periods, and each of the monthly rents from November 2, 2014 to November 1, 2015 is KRW 581,830.

(Specific Details are as indicated in the separate sheet). [The grounds for recognition] / [The fact that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4, appraiser E's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the defendants' defense prior to the merits

A. The Defendants answer that the instant lawsuit ought to be dismissed in the written reply dated January 30, 2015.

B. The Defendants asserted as above and did not specifically specify the contents of the defense prior to the merits, and otherwise ex officio examine ex officio the defects in the requirements of the lawsuit in this case.

3. Determination as to the merits.