logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.02.09 2017가단17826
부동산퇴거 등
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. On June 28, 2017, the Plaintiff received the registration of ownership transfer from Nonparty C for each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on June 19, 2017 (hereinafter “instant sale”). The fact that the Defendant occupied the instant real estate is no dispute between the parties.

B. According to the above facts, barring special circumstances, such as the existence of possessory right, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff with the exclusion of interference with the Plaintiff’s ownership.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. First, the Defendant: (a) concluded a real estate exchange agreement with the Defendant to exchange forest and apartment land including the instant real estate owned by the Defendant, and an officetel located in Seo-gu Incheon, Incheon, which is owned by the Defendant with E on March 14, 2017; (b) pursuant to such agreement, the ownership of the instant real estate was transferred to E in accordance with the said agreement; (c) the instant officetel was confirmed later and the said officetel was not bound to be reversed in the state where the ownership transfer registration is in excess of the ownership transfer registration to other; and (d) upon the request of E to restore the above to the original state, E promised to return the instant real estate to the original state. As such, as the Defendant has a repurchase right to the instant real estate, the instant claim of this case is unjustifiable, but the Defendant’s assertion cannot be asserted against the Plaintiff with the Defendant’s repurchase right, and therefore, the said assertion itself is without merit.

B. Next, the Defendant is obligated to cancel the instant sales contract between the Plaintiff and C as a fraudulent act against the Defendant, and the Plaintiff is obligated to cancel the registration of ownership transfer due to the instant sales and purchase of the instant real estate, which eventually is the legitimate owner of the instant real estate.

arrow