logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.02.17 2015가단50975
토지인도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, and 4 and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the request for surveying and appraisal by this Court:

On June 24, 1991, C, which had been the former husband of the Plaintiff, completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of this case on the two-gun B, Yang-gun, Gangwon-do (hereinafter “instant land”). On February 3, 1998, C completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land.

B. C also purchased the instant land and D residence on the instant land at the time of purchase from D previously owned by the former owner. At the time of completing the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land, the instant housing existed in the future at the time of completing the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land.

C. Of the instant land, cement packaging is being constructed on the ground of the portion (c) part (c) of 97 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant dispute”) connected with each point of 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 9 in sequence, among the instant land.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is obligated to remove the part of the dispute of this case and deliver the part of the dispute of this case to the plaintiff, since the defendant's packaging on the part of the dispute of this case among the land of this case and occupied and used it.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant did not possess the part of the dispute of this case.

B. Determination of whether a road is occupied by the State or a local government can be divided into possession as a road management authority and possession as a de facto controller. In fact, in a case where the existing road is determined by the Road Act, or where the road is constructed by the implementation of an urban planning project under the Urban Planning Act, possession as a road management authority may be recognized from the time of the existing road. However, the State or a local government does not perform the act of building a road pursuant to the

arrow