beta
Text
1. The defendant
(a) Each corporeal movable property listed in the separate sheet (2) of the building stated in the separate sheet (1).
Reasons
On March 17, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the building listed in the separate sheet (1) in the procedure for a compulsory auction by official auction by Gwangju District Court B on March 17, 2016, and the Defendant acquired the ownership of each of the above corporeal movables in the auction procedure conducted with respect to each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet (2) listed in the separate sheet (1) listed in the attached sheet (2) recorded in the attached sheet (2) on February 5, 2016, and thereafter, the ownership of each of the above corporeal movables was acquired at the auction procedure by the Gwangju District Court 2015No545, and thereafter, the fact that the said corporeal movables are detained in the above building as they are by no dispute between
According to the above facts, the defendant's custody of each of the above corporeal movables in the above building without obtaining legitimate authority from the plaintiff. This constitutes an illegal possession that infringes upon the plaintiff's ownership of the above building.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to collect the above corporeal movables from the above building and deliver the above building to the plaintiff.
In addition, from March 17, 2016, the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s ownership, to the completion date of delivery of the said building, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the money calculated by the ratio of KRW 900,000 (No. 7) per month, which is the amount equivalent to the rent, to the damages incurred by the Plaintiff to prevent the Plaintiff from using the said building in conformity with its usage.
In regard to this, the defendant originally owned each of the above corporeal movables, and C merely reserved the collection by again purchasing each of the above corporeal movables from the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is unreasonable. However, the above argument is without merit.
Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and accepted.