logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2016.04.27 2014가단217251
건물명도 등
Text

1. The remaining amount of each real estate listed in the separate sheet after deducting the expenses for auction from the proceeds of auction;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant shared the land listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) and the building listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant building”) with respect to co-ownership, and the joint title of the instant land and the instant building is jointly owned by one-half of their respective shares.

B. (1) The instant land is located in the C market, and the instant building on the ground of the instant land is used as a frequency, restaurant, etc.

(2) Of the instant building, the part on “Ban 1” and “Ga 1” and “Ga 2” are leased respectively by the Defendant and used and used by the lessee as a frequency, etc.

C. (1) The plaintiff acquired co-ownership share of the pertinent real estate, and thereafter the defendant was found to have held a separate agreement on partition of the jointly owned property.

B. (2) The Plaintiff requested the management of the instant real estate in consultation with the Plaintiff, upon requesting the notification of the details of the lease management mentioned in paragraph (2), but the Defendant did not comply therewith.

(2) The defendant up to now 1-2

B. (2) The lessee has been solely paid the lease deposit and rent from the lessee mentioned in subsection (2).

(3) The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to return the rent received from the above lessee as unjust enrichment and subsequently distributed the rent to the Defendant according to the original Defendant’s co-ownership, the Plaintiff expressed his intention to ratification the lease agreement that the Defendant independently concluded, but the Defendant did not comply with the Plaintiff’s request by asserting that the instant real estate was co-ownership.

(4) The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking division of the instant real estate on November 24, 2014, but no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the method of division of the said real estate until the date of closing the argument.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's entries, Gap's 1, 2, 4, and 5, Gap.

arrow