beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.20 2012가단3461

건물명도

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) around May 1971, when the Plaintiff owned 104.1 square meters of F site in Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant land”); (b) around December 1972, the Plaintiff obtained a construction permit jointly with the owner of the neighboring land; and (c) newly constructed one building (Evis apartment; hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land and its neighboring land as indicated in the separate list. As a result, the Plaintiff had acquired the sectional ownership of the instant building in proportion to the share of the instant land among the entire site of the building. However, from around May 2001, the Defendant leased the Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor’s (hereinafter “Defendant’s Intervenor”) store, which is not the owner of the instant building without the Plaintiff’s permission, to use it as the leased store without permission; and (d) the Defendant also asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to name the instant store and return the unjust enrichment from the commencement of the lease to the date of completion of the lease agreement.

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. A. Around 1976, the party to the lawsuit of the Defendant’s Intervenor (Appointed Party) entered into a sales contract with the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor regarding the stores belonging to the Plaintiff’s sectional ownership (including the instant stores) of the instant building. The Defendant’s Intervenor paid the purchase price to the Plaintiff as a substitute for the Plaintiff’s repayment of the existing obligation to the Defendant’s Intervenor and the Defendant’s Intervenor, and possessed the said stores.

(However, since the building of this case was unregistered, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the intervenor joining the Defendant was not made. However, the Plaintiff was subject to the said sale from the intervenor joining the Defendant or the Intervenor joining the Defendant for over 30 years since the said sale was made.