logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.04.12 2016가단4362
건물명도
Text

1. Of the second floor of the real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is classified into Section 1, Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, and Section 1.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is an organization consisting of owners of land, etc. who conduct an urban environment improvement project by setting the size of 43281.8m2 in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a project implementation district.

The defendant is a person who occupies the area of 3.30 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant real estate”) which connects each point of Section 1, 2, 3, 4 and 3.30 square meters in sequence, among the two floors of the attached real estate located in the project implementation district as shown in the attached Form 1.

The head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government approved the implementation of the project on September 11, 2014, and approved the management and disposal plan on November 26, 2015, and announced it on the same day.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including provisional parcel number circulation), and when authorization and public notice of a management and disposal plan is given pursuant to Article 49(6) and (3) of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claim for the purport of the entire pleadings, the use and profit-making of the previous owner, lessee, etc. of the subject matter shall be suspended, and the project implementer may take over the subject matter and use it for profit-making in order to start the construction work (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da28394, Nov. 24, 201). According to the above facts of recognition, according to

The plaintiff's non-resident's assertion is merely an association for urban environment rearrangement project, not an association for the plaintiff's urban environment rearrangement project, and the plaintiff's approval plan and project implementation authorization are invalid.

Notwithstanding its title, the plaintiff is recognized as an organization consisting of owners of land, etc. and is not a promotion committee which is not a pre-level of establishing an association under Article 13 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter

The proviso of Article 13(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas does not enforce the establishment of an association if it is intended to implement an urban environment rearrangement project, and allow the owners of land and others to

arrow