(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.09.03 2013가단123914

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) 서울동부지방법원 2014.09.03 2013가단123914

건물등철거

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. As to the land size of 1541m2 (hereinafter “the instant forest”), the ownership transfer registration made on October 7, 1961 to Nonparty C, in the name of Nonparty D, on December 23, 2003, on July 11, 2005, was successively completed on July 11, 2005.

B. Of the forest land of this case, the Defendant: (a) contained in the annexed drawing Nos. 1, (2), (3), (4), (5), and (1) indicated the annexed drawing Nos. 236 square meters (hereinafter “the instant road”) in a concrete package, and provided them as the passage of neighboring residents; and (b) performed the construction with a cover over an Amcom from March 24, 2008 to July 11, 2008.

C. Around July 2, 2010, the Defendant started construction of the water supply pipes with a diameter of 75 meters at the point of 120cm underground of the part of the instant road and completed construction around December 20, 2010.

【Ground of recognition” without a dispute, entry or video of Gap's Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, and Eul's Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10 (including a serial number), and inquiry of the fact with respect to the head of the Yangyang-gun waterworks business of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the request for removal of waterworks pipes

A. According to the above facts, the defendant, the owner of the road of this case, is obligated to remove the water supply pipes installed underground in the road of this case to the plaintiff, the owner of the road of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

B. (1) The defendant asserts that the former owner has already renounced his exclusive right to use and benefit from the road of this case among the forest of this case, and that since the plaintiff acquired the ownership with the knowledge of the fact, the delivery of the road of this case or the removal of the water supply pipes installed under the above ground cannot be claimed to the defendant, and the plaintiff's claim constitutes abuse of rights.

In this regard, the Plaintiff asserted that the former owner and the Plaintiff did not waive their exclusive rights to use and benefit.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.22 2017가단5014676

-대전지방법원천안지원 2015.11.17 2015가단1235

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.09 2015가단24674

-대법원 2015.01.29 2014다227478

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.11.07 2018가단103350