beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.02.15 2015가단29994

토지인도등

Text

1. Defendant B received KRW 8,418,620 from the Plaintiff simultaneously with the Plaintiff’s payment:

A. Defendant B is listed in the separate sheet.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D is the sequences listed in the separate sheet

2. The sequences listed in the separate sheet, which are real estate (hereinafter “instant land”) and buildings on the ground.

1. Real estate (hereinafter referred to as “building No. 2 of this case”) and the sequences thereof;

3. The real estate (hereinafter “instant building”) was owned.

B. On October 26, 200, E acquired the instant land and building No. 1 during the public sale procedure, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 22, 200. The Plaintiff purchased the instant land and building No. 1 from E on December 12, 200 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 28, 2005.

F has purchased the building No. 2 from D on July 12, 2007 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 31, 2007. Defendant B purchased the building No. 2 from F on August 16, 2012 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 9, 2012.

(3) Part 4.02 is a building attached to the building of this case, which consists of a building attached to the building of this case.

B. Defendant C completed a move-in report on January 16, 2012 with the consent of Defendant B, and occupies the building No. 2 of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-6 evidence (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the land of this case and the building No. 2 belong to another owner due to a public auction, since the land of this case and the building No. 2 belong to another owner, the land of this case was established under customary statutory superficies for owning the building No. 22 on November 22, 2000.

However, comprehensively taking account of the contents and images of evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 5 as a whole, the building of this case can be acknowledged as having not been solid enough to the extent similar to stone, stone, and bricks in terms of physical and chemical external strength or fire resistance or difficulty in dismantling a building, which were built of a prefabricated panel structure above cement foundation.