logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2017.01.12 2015가단4359
건물인도 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant occupies the building indicated in the attached Form, owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”), and thus, is obligated to deliver the said building to the Plaintiff and pay unjust enrichment or damages equivalent to the rent by the completion date of delivery of the said building.

2. Even if a transferee of a building without permission, the ownership of the building cannot be acquired unless the registration of ownership transfer has been completed, and it cannot be deemed that there is a customary real right equivalent to the ownership to the transferee of the building in such an condition. Thus, a person who newly constructed the building and purchased the building from the original acquisitor, but fails to complete the registration of ownership transfer, may not directly request the illegal occupant of the building to surrender the building on his own ownership, etc.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff was not the owner of the building of this case and the building owner of the building of this case is not the owner of the building of this case, even if the Plaintiff was not the owner of the building of this case, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed the owner of the building of this case under the law.

Therefore, the claim of this case based on the premise that the plaintiff is the owner of the building of this case cannot be accepted without considering the defendant's argument about the possession title in light of the above legal principles.

4. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed for reasons.

arrow