beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.02.18 2019가단327843

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The Defendants shall deliver the real estate listed in the attached real estate list.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3...

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff is an association that obtained approval for the establishment of a housing redevelopment project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”) under the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; Act No. 14567, Feb. 9, 2018; and Article 25 of the Addenda of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter the same shall apply) in order to implement the housing redevelopment project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”) under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the “Urban Improvement Act”).

B. On May 25, 2009, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization from the head of Busan District Office for the implementation of the instant project on December 29, 2016, and obtained the authorization for the implementation of the project, and subsequently obtained the authorization for the modification of the management and disposition plan as of March 27, 2018, and the head of Busan District Office announced the management and disposition plan as of April 4, 2018.

On the other hand, on March 3, 2017, the Plaintiff received the application for parcelling-out from March 3, 2017 to April 5, 2017 when publicly announcing the application for parcelling-out by the union members for parcelling-out on the instant project, and thereafter received the application for parcelling-out by extending the period from April 6, 2017 to April 25, 2017.

x Defendant B was the owner of the real estate in the annexed sheet No. 3-1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) in the project zone and became the subject of cash settlement because he did not apply for the application for the parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out, and Defendant C opened the “E pharmacy” in the attached sheet No. 3-2 real estate (hereinafter referred to as “instant store”) in the attached sheet No. 12 as shown in the attached sheet No. 3-2 in the attached sheet No. 12 in the order of each point among the 23 stores of the first floor of the instant real estate.

(v) the Plaintiff;