지료
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for an additional determination as to the defendant’s assertion, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of
2. In addition, the defendant is a legal superficies under Article 366 of the Civil Act, which shall take precedence over the ownership of the plaintiff's land of this case.
The plaintiff asserts that he shall exercise the right to sell the land of this case.
However, the purport of Article 366 of the Civil Act, which recognizes legal superficies, is the reason for public interest in order to prevent social and economic losses, such as removal of buildings, in a case where land and buildings on the ground of auction of mortgaged objects belong to the ownership of different persons respectively, and does not protect any one of the parties' interests (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 65Da2587, Sept. 6, 196; 9Da52602, Nov. 23, 1999). The defendant's legal superficies on the land of this case cannot be deemed to have priority over the plaintiff's ownership. The defendant is obligated to pay rent to the plaintiff under Article 366 of the Civil Act instead of removing the building of this case, and there is no ground for recognizing the right to claim sale of the land of this case as the defendant claims.
The defendant's argument is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.