beta
Text
1. On January 23, 2017, the Daejeon District Court No. 414 decided January 23, 2017 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On the ground of Daejeon Pungdong-gu C, D, and E, a block structure 143.6 square meters roof house, F, C, and D, as shown in the attached Form No. 1, is constructed on the ground of land of the block structure 143.6 square meters, F, C, and D, such as the land of the attached Form No. 2, a block structure sl.8 square meters (hereinafter “instant house”). However, there are no registers and building registers for the said buildings.
B. The Plaintiff asserted that 1 was the Plaintiff’s ownership, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as Daejeon District Court 2014Kadan19131.
The appellate court of the above case revoked the judgment of the first instance and sentenced to the judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim (Seoul District Court 2015Na4250), and the plaintiff's appeal was dismissed, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 27, 2016.
C. According to the ruling of acceptance by the Land Tribunal of the Daejeon Metropolitan City, housing 1 and 2 attached Form 1 were expropriated in the Seongbuk-gu, Daejeon Metropolitan City, and the Seongbuk-gu, Daejeon Metropolitan City paid compensation for expropriation to the Defendant for housing 1 attached Form d.
On the other hand, the Seongbuk-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City deposited KRW 53,314,00 as the Plaintiff or the Defendant on January 23, 2017, on the ground that it is not possible to identify who is the holder of the right to claim compensation for the instant house.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3 and 5, the result of the commission of document delivery to the head of the Seongbuk-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The following circumstances, i.e., the judgment of Daejeon District Court No. 2015Na4250, although the Plaintiff did not specify the instant house as the instant house, is a building other than the Plaintiff’s house Nos. 3 through 10, and the written evidence Nos. 3 through 3, as a whole, based on the overall purport of the pleadings.