건물명도등
1. The defendant shall deliver the building in the attached list (A) to the plaintiff.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On the ground of the attached list (A) part of the attached list, there is a building consisting of a building ledger and a board that is not prepared by a certified copy of the building register (hereinafter “instant building”).
B. On November 8, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building and completed the registration of transfer of ownership as the receipt of No. 50039 on December 18, 2014, from the Gyeonggi-do Ansan-gun, the 228 square meters, E large 28 square meters, and the 80.4 square meters of the building on both the above sites (hereinafter “instant housing”).
C. At present, the building of this case is currently occupied by the defendant, who is the starting partner of C.
【Ground of recognition】 A-1, 3-2, 5-1, 5-2, 5-3 evidence, Eul-1, 1-2, 1-3, 5-5 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of recognition prior to the determination of the cause of the claim, since the Plaintiff purchased the instant building from the former owner C and acquired its ownership, it shall be deemed that the Defendant possessed it, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.
B. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant asserts that since the building of this case was leased from C to a house, it can be asserted against the plaintiff with the above right of lease, or it is only obligated to deliver the building of this case only with the payment of KRW 35,000,00 as agreed by C and the simultaneous performance.
According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 5, a lease contract (No. 5, hereinafter "the contract of this case") between C and the defendant to the effect that deposit money of 35,00,000,000 won for the housing of this case is prepared and the fixed date is granted as of June 21, 2010 to the contract of this case, but there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that there is no receipt of the money under the name of lease deposit between C and the defendant, unlike the written contract of this case.
In other words, the defendant and C.