logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.10.07 2020가단109202
건물인도
Text

The Defendants constitute Defendant 2 as indicated in attached Form B, “A mark of real estate to be delivered to each Defendant.”

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment project partnership that obtained approval for establishment from the head of Dongdaemun-gu Office on December 3, 2008 pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project with respect to the housing redevelopment project with respect to the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Daily (hereinafter “instant project zone”).

B. The head of Dongdaemun-gu approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposition plan on October 4, 2019, and announced it on the same day.

C. The Defendants occupy each of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet No. B (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) with the indication of the real estate to be delivered to each of the Defendant in the instant business area.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each branch number, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. When a public notice of a management and disposal plan stipulated in the Act on the Determination of Urban Improvement is given, the use and profit-making of right holders, such as owners, superficies, persons having a right to lease on the previous land or buildings, shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff who acquired the right to use and benefit from each of the instant real estate after obtaining authorization and public notice of a management

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is with merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow