logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.06.21 2018재나59
청구이의
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent in records or significant to this court:

On December 30, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant, stating that “Issan Branch of the Daejeon District Court (hereinafter “Seosan Branch”) was dismissed all compulsory execution based on the order of the B dated March 28, 2005, and Seosan Branch of the District Court (hereinafter “Seosan Branch”) on November 6, 2002, as stated in the aforementioned purport of the claim.”

B. On June 13, 2014, the Western District Court accepted the Plaintiff’s assertion on the following grounds, and sentenced the first instance judgment that “The compulsory execution based on the Seosan-Support 2000dan7099 and the Seosan-Support B shall not be permitted.”

The Plaintiff completed the construction of electric transmission lines in the area of Siljin-si and Seosan-si (hereinafter “the instant transmission line”), and the Defendant is the owner of Siljin-si CY 5,990 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”) and the said transmission line passed over the airspace of the instant land.

The defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff seeking the removal of the power transmission line of this case, and paid the defendant with unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the site of the removal of the power transmission line of this case. The judgment of the court below (Seosan Branch 2000da7099) and the above judgment became final and conclusive after it became final and conclusive.

Nevertheless, on March 28, 2005, the Plaintiff did not remove the power transmission line of this case, upon the Defendant’s request, and “the Plaintiff removed the power transmission line of this case within 60 days from the date of receiving the notice of this decision and, if the Plaintiff did not perform its obligation, paid the Defendant KRW 3,000,000 per month until the completion of the removal of the said power transmission line.” (Susan Support B) and the said decision became final and conclusive thereafter.

After that, there was a ruling of use on October 20, 2009 with regard to the part of the site that the instant transmission line passed among the instant land, which was the date of commencement of use on October 20, 209.

arrow