건물인도등
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. Basic facts
A. Each registration of ownership transfer in the name of G, H, and I was completed with respect to the land of this case on May 10, 2013 and July 31, 2013 with respect to each of the instant land on the grounds of sale from May 1, 2013 to July 30, 2013.
B. On May 7, 2013, the Plaintiff changed the name of the owner registered in the name of the Plaintiff as to the building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) newly constructed on each of the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”) in the name of G, and subsequently received a certificate of change of construction participants from the competent authority, and completed the registration of change in the name of the Plaintiff as to the instant building on July 31, 2013.
C. Meanwhile, from August 23, 2013, the Defendants occupied and used the fourth floor of the instant building from around August 23, 2013 to the date of the closing of argument in the instant case (hereinafter “instant building”).
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 8 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties’ assertion and the issues of the instant case
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, who was the actual owner of each of the instant lands and buildings, had a claim of KRW 230 million in total, including investment deposit claims, against J. However, on May 2013, the Plaintiff agreed that the ownership of each of the instant lands and buildings was transferred under title trust with J, etc. under the name of J, etc. under the pretext of accord and satisfaction with the said claims, and that the ownership of each of the instant lands and buildings was transferred under title trust with G, etc. In addition, each of the instant lands and buildings under the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “each of the instant registrations”).
each complete the proceedings.
Therefore, the Defendants, who possess without title the instant building part, did not object to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building.