logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.11.15 2017가단211157
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Defendants shall deliver each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) that sets the whole project district, including the land of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

B. With respect to the instant rearrangement project, the head of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced and announced the implementation of the project on May 31, 2010, and around July 2016, the management and disposal plan and announcement was made.

C. The Defendants are the owners or occupants of the pertinent real estate indicated in the separate sheet in the project zone of the instant rearrangement project.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Gap 3's evidence 1, 2, Gap 4, Eul 8's evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. When a public announcement of a management and disposal plan under Article 49(3) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) regarding the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim is made, the use and profit-making of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended, and the project implementer shall be able to use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Examining the above facts in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the pertinent real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff

3. Determination as to Defendant B and C’s assertion

A. The above Defendants asserted to the effect that they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request for extradition since they were not paid the resettlement funds, housing relocation expenses, and movable property transfer expenses (hereinafter “settlement funds, etc.”) by the Plaintiff.

1) Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”)

Article 78 (1) and (5), Article 41 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Articles 53 through 55 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, shall be the settlement money, the cost of moving a house, and

arrow