(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.11.28 2013가합71699

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) 의정부지방법원 2014.11.28 2013가합71699

업종제한의무부존재확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the remaining Defendants except the defendant R&A management body shall be dismissed respectively.

2.Attachment 1.

Reasons

1. The plaintiffs' lawsuit of confirming the legitimacy of the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant 1 through 15 is allowed when the plaintiff's right or legal status is currently unstable and dangerous, and the defendant 1 or 15 is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute.

Based on the above legal doctrine, there is no such specific dispute as to the existence or compliance of the duty to restrict business sector due to the business type of the first floor No. 103 of the Dongducheon-si Building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) owned by the Plaintiffs, unless there is any specific dispute as to the existence or compliance of the duty to restrict business sector due to the overlap with the business type in the other stores of the instant commercial building, it cannot be said that there is an apprehension or risk in the Plaintiffs’ rights or legal status. The seeking confirmation of the absence of the duty to restrict business sector against only Defendant 1 or 15, who is merely a part of the entire sectional owners of the instant commercial building or the management body of the instant commercial building, cannot be deemed the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’

2. According to the health team, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 10, Eul evidence No. 5, and the purport of witness S's testimony and pleading as to whether the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the management committee of defendant RR building was legitimate or not, it can be recognized that the name of the management committee of the commercial building of this case, which is established automatically pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter "the Aggregate Buildings Act"), was the "R Buildings Management Committee", and last is changed into "RR building management committee", and the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant who is not a party to the lawsuit is unlawful, since it is against the defendant who is not a party to the lawsuit.

3. The plaintiffs' claim against Defendant R&A management body.

참조조문

-집합건물의 소유 및 관리에 관한 법률 제23조

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2021.04.07 2020나100657

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.04.16 2019가합7324

-울산지방법원 2014.05.22 2013가합2906

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.02.09 2017가단117314

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.03.08 2017가단58609