(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.05.25 2016가단520238

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.05.25 2016가단520238

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

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

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 25, 1996, the net C completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building on September 10, 2007, on the ground of inheritance by consultation and division on July 15, 1999, with respect to a house of 99 square meters and 99 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”). The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building on July 15, 1999.

B. The defendant is residing in the building of this case from November 2007.

C. Since the Defendant, along with Nonparty E, trusted the Plaintiff’s shares inherited from Dongwon District Court to the Plaintiff, the Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on the restoration of real name with respect to each one-third of their respective shares of inheritance among the instant buildings (2016da509224).

On January 12, 2017, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the claim of the defendant and E, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 8, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff as the owner of the building of this case.

B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant has the right to occupy the building of this case since the defendant and Dong E entrusted one-third share of the building of this case to the plaintiff through an agreement division of inherited property. However, the fact that the judgment rejecting the above assertion became final and conclusive is as stated above, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the defendant has the right to possess the building of this case.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and this is accepted.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원평택지원 2020.10.07 2020가단53086

-울산지방법원 2018.01.11 2017나23370

-대전지방법원공주지원 2016.06.02 2015가단2682

-대구지방법원경주지원 2016.04.15 2015가합199

-수원지방법원 2018.04.18 2017나64934