logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.06.15 2017가합101575
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) stated the “sale price” column in the attached Table 2 of the sales contract statement from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a party. 1) The Plaintiff is the Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Y Total Z improvement project (hereinafter “instant improvement project”).

(2) The Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) on April 28, 2016, upon obtaining authorization to establish an association from the head of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and on April 28, 2016.

(2) The Defendants are owners of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) located within the instant rearrangement project site.

B. (1) On June 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit. The Plaintiff stated in the complaint that “if it is necessary to urge the Defendants to agree to establish an association against the Defendants, the Plaintiff shall serve a duplicate of the instant complaint in accordance with the Urban Improvement Act, and the Plaintiff’s urge the relevant Defendants to consent to establish an association pursuant to Article 48(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”) with the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint in this case.” (2) The Plaintiff attached to the complaint a written statement stating the Plaintiff’s association’s articles of association and the Plaintiff’s intent to consent to the establishment, etc. (hereinafter “the written consent of this case”).

3) The Defendants were served with a copy of the instant complaint on each day stated in the separate sheet No. 200, and did not respond to whether they agreed to the Plaintiff’s establishment by the lapse of two months from the respective delivery dates of the instant complaint. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim

(a)a Party;

arrow