logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.07.25 2017가단6113
건물철거 등
Text

1. Defendant B shall indicate 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. The Plaintiff indicated in the attached Form No. 218 square meters on the ground of Jeonnam-gun, Youngnam-gun.

Reasons

1. Around March 7, 1996, Defendant C purchased, from Defendant B, the unregistered ground buildings (it is indicated as 1968 square meters on the construction permit date on the general building ledger, wooden housing 26.7 square meters; hereinafter “former building”) that were owned by B, and the unregistered ground buildings (it is indicated as 1968 square meters on the building permit date on the general building ledger, and wooden housing 26.7 square meters; hereinafter “former building”).

Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land on March 8, 1996, and the old building was left unregistered, and no registration has been made until now.

The land in this case was transferred to E through a compulsory auction on March 2006, and the ownership was again transferred to Defendant C through a donation on August 16, 2010.

피고 C은 이후 구 건물을 개보수하고(지붕, 내부 수리 등), 방(16.56㎡)과 창고(15.2㎡)를 증축하였고, 현재까지 별지 도면 표시 ㄱ, ㄴ, ㄷ, ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, ㅅ, ㅇ, ㄱ의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 (ㄱ) 부분 시멘트블럭조 삼석지붕 단층 주택 68.6㎡와 별지 도면 표시 ㄴ, ㅈ, ㅊ, ㅋ, ㄹ, ㄷ, ㄴ의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 (ㄴ) 부분 파이프조 강판지붕 단층 창고 15.2㎡(이하 주택과 창고를 통틀어 ‘신 건물’이라 한다)를 사용하고 있다.

On August 30, 2017, the Plaintiff won the land of this case at a successful bid and paid it in full in the case of F real estate auction by the Gwangju District Court for the compulsory auction of real estate.

[Ground of recognition] B between the plaintiff and the defendant: Confession (Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act) and the defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant, each entry of Gap Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, according to the determination as to the cause of the claim, the new building is owned by Defendant B, the first building, and even if it is based on the images of evidence Nos. 6 and evidence Nos. 5, it is difficult to view that the present shape of the housing building was significantly changed compared to that of around 2010, and the warehouse is also independent of the housing and its economic utility.

arrow