beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The land D and the land owned by the Defendant, owned by the Plaintiff, are adjacent to each other.
B. The Defendant newly constructed a 80.4 square meter (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the land of Seopopoposi, Seopoposi District, the first class neighborhood living facilities, the first class neighborhood living facilities, the first class neighborhood living facilities of one story, and obtained approval for use on August 6, 2014. A part of the instant building is located within 50 centimeters from the boundary of the said land and D land.
【Fact-finding without any dispute over the basis of recognition】A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, Eul’s evidence Nos. 3, Eul’s evidence Nos. 5-1 and 2, and the result of the appraisal commission to the director of the Korea Land Information Corporation and its branch offices and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and its determination are the cause of the instant claim. The Plaintiff alleged that, based on the provisions of the Civil Act, against the Defendant, the Defendant sought removal of a part of 7 square meters within 50 cm from the boundary of the land and D land in Seoposi City and Seoposi, and the part within 50 cm from the boundary of the instant building. However, the Plaintiff’s claim for removal of the neighboring land owner against the person who constructed the building without a distance of 50 cm or more from the boundary is not allowed after the commencement of the construction or after the completion of the construction (proviso of Article 242(2) of the Civil Act). As seen earlier, the fact that the instant building was completed and approved for use on August 6, 2014 after the completion of the construction and the completion of the construction was clearly made on April 11, 2016. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit
3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.