건물명도(인도)
1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff each real estate listed in the separate sheet.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. 1) In order to implement a housing reconstruction improvement project with the size of 36,243.80 square meters as a rearrangement zone located in Yongsan-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the Plaintiff is entitled to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).
(2) On September 29, 2017, the original city approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposition plan and publicly notified it.
3) The Defendants are each real estate listed in the separate sheet located in the Plaintiff’s rearrangement zone (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).
(3) The reasoning of the judgment below is as follows: (a) there is no dispute over each of the instant real estate as co-owners; (b) Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (which has a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings.
B. Determination 1) The main text of Article 81(1) of the Urban Improvement Act provides, “When the authorization of the management and disposal plan is publicly notified, the owners, superficies, persons having rights to lease on a deposit basis, lease on a deposit basis, etc. of the previous land or buildings shall not use or profit from the previous land or buildings until the date the transfer is publicly notified under Article 86.” Thus, when the authorization of the management and disposal plan is publicly notified, the use of or profit from the former land or buildings by the right holders, such as owners, superficies, persons having rights to lease on a deposit basis, etc. shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use or profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants whose use or profit from each real estate of this case has been suspended
2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion
A. The Defendants’ assertion that they are subject to cash liquidation are subject to cash liquidation who did not apply for parcelling-out to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendants are subject to the premise that they are members of the Plaintiff.