logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.05.30 2017가단31865
건물철거 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant), among forest land E in Gangseo-si, 4,055 square meters;

A. Defendant C also indicates 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 4,055 square meters of forest E in Gangnam-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

나. 피고 C는 이 사건 토지 중 별지 참고도 표시 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 1의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㈎부분 지상 목조 스레트지붕 단층주택 77㎡을, 피고 D은 같은 참고도 표시 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 8의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㈏부분 지상 목조 스레트지붕 단층주택 61㎡을, 피고 B는 같은 참고도 표시 19, 12, 11, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㈐부분 블록조 스레트지붕 단층주택 100㎡를 각 소유하고 있다.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, entry and video of evidence A1 and 5 (including paper numbers), result of on-site verification by this Court, result of the survey and appraisal by appraiser F (Korea Land Information Corporation), purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The grounds for the principal lawsuit and the Defendants’ right of lease defense (i.e., the Plaintiff primarily sought against the Defendants the removal and delivery of the land owned by the Defendants based on the ownership of the land, and the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff leased and occupied the instant land from G and G inheritors, the owner of the instant land, and leased the instant land from the Plaintiff around March 2017.

In addition, when the above defense of the Defendants is accepted, the Plaintiff terminated the above lease contract with the preparatory brief dated July 18, 2017, and sought removal of the above ground buildings owned by the Defendants and delivery of the land.

B. As to the Plaintiff’s primary argument, the Defendants owned the instant land from December 17, 1976, and leased the instant land from G and G’s successors who died on July 30, 2016, in full view of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s primary argument: (b) the Plaintiff’s testimony was examined, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, Eul 1, Eul 1, and 2 (including paper numbers); and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

arrow