logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.06.11 2013나6330
통행방해금지 등
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C shall be dismissed.

3. Defendant C’s concurrently and Defendant C’s.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 1999, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the size of 2,536 square meters in the petitioner-gu, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, on June 9, 2003, with respect to the land of 1,276 square meters in the E preceding 1,276 square meters in relation thereto (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant and the Intervenor B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) affiliated with the above two lands on November 26, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of 491 square meters in the form of T&D 491 square meters in the form of land category change and registration conversion; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant’s land”).

B. The Plaintiff’s land in this case is the land owned by each other in the Cheongju-si, the petition-gu U, V, W, X,Y, Z, AA, and AB, and the franchis that do not pass through a road for contribution surrounded by the Defendant’s land, etc.

C. In the vicinity of the Plaintiff’s land, there was a contribution to passing through each of the lots of land of 42 square meters and 1,033 square meters in Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, J., and I road (hereinafter “instant contribution”). The said contribution and the Defendant’s land include part of the land, such as K, M, N,O, etc. (hereinafter “instant access”). The Plaintiff has passed the instant contribution from the Plaintiff’s land via the Defendant’s land and the instant access.

On May 26, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Company on the instant disputed land with the Cheongju District Court 201Kadan14008, but withdrawn the said lawsuit on December 20, 2011. After which the instant lawsuit was filed, the Defendant Company obstructed Plaintiff’s passage by piling concrete structures on the instant land at issue from February 2, 2012 to September 23, 2014, where the on-site verification was conducted.

[Grounds for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 4 through 15, Gap evidence 18 to 20, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and Eul evidence 5 to 5.

arrow