beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) the Defendant acquired ownership of the above land by completely paying the sale price on March 26, 2013 by owning trees on the instant land on July 18, 200; (b) the ownership of buildings or other structures or trees on July 18, 200 due to superficies contract on July 18, 200; (c) the ownership of the entire land: the scope of ownership, period: from July 18, 200 to 30 years; and (d) the registration of creation of superficies on the land rent and time for payment was completed; (c) the Plaintiff was a purchaser of the Lwon District Court branch E, F, and F, a compulsory auction procedure for real estate on the instant land, which was commenced by the Plaintiff on March 26, 200; and (d) the Defendant did not own the above land on the instant land on the basis of possessing trees planted on the instant land on March 26, 2013; or (d) the purport of the entire evidence No. 267215, from March 26, 2015.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, a person holding superficies of the instant land, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is the owner of the instant land, the annual rent of KRW 2,616,952 from March 27, 2014 to March 26, 2015, and delay damages therefor, and the rent calculated by the rate of KRW 26,16,952 per annum from March 27, 2015 to the date of delivery of the said land.
In order to claim the payment of the land rent because the payment of the land rent is not an element of the superficies, the parties shall have an agreement on the land rent between them, or the land rent shall be determined by a court as it constitutes legal superficies (Article 305(1), Article 366 of the Civil Act). In this case, there is an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the land rent.
There is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant's superficies constitutes legal superficies and that the rent has been determined by the court.
Furthermore, Article 69 of the Registration of Real Estate Act is amended.