logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.10.31 2017나3718
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On August 30, 1983, Gangwon-do, which acquired the Plaintiff’s share in the instant land, completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the transfer on June 18, 1983 with respect to D 146 square meters (road name address is “YYY”; hereinafter “instant land”).

On January 30, 1984, G, the plaintiff's reference, purchased 415/846 shares out of the land of this case from Gangwon-do, and made a registration of transfer of shares on June 16, 1984.

H purchased 53/846 shares of the instant land from Gangwon-do on April 6, 2001, and completed the registration of transfer of shares on July 18, 1984. G purchased the entire shares of the said H (53/846) on April 6, 2001, and completed the registration of transfer of shares on April 11, 2001.

G on November 27, 2006, 329/846 of the total amount of shares of the above G was 468/846, and the remainder was 139/846, respectively, donated to the Plaintiff, and the remainder was 139/846, and the transfer registration was made on November 29, 2006.

G died on April 10, 2010.

The current status of the instant housing is, on the ground of the instant land, cement season and five attached buildings (hereinafter “instant housing”) outside of 1,000, which were newly constructed around 1955.

The instant house is unregistered.

The Defendant, from June 2013 to June 2016, while performing the construction of Li Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Tri Triri Triririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririri

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 10, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 5, the result of the appraisal by the appraiser L of the first instance trial, and the purport of the whole argument of the plaintiff, the house of this case was newly constructed by the plaintiff's her 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's ''

In the vicinity of the instant house, the Defendant carried out the construction of the instant house, and due to blasting work during the said construction work, the cracks, fellings, and water leakage phenomenon, etc. of the instant house.

arrow