beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B’s route party is indicated in the attached Form No. 1, (2), (3), (4), and (5), among the area of 194 square meters in Gyeong-gun, Gyeongnam-gun.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, is the owner of 194 square meters wide (hereinafter “instant land”). Defendant B senior citizens’ association established a new building by granting a loan to use the instant land. However, since the use, profit-making was terminated in accordance with the original purpose, or the period sufficient to use, or profit-making was expired, the Plaintiff’s loan is terminated by delivering a copy of the complaint of this case.
Therefore, Defendant B-ro party is obligated to remove the instant land building to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and to leave the said building from Defendant C who leased and used the said building from Defendant B-ro party.
2. In light of the fact that there is no dispute as to the claim against Defendant B, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 28, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 28, and Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 1 through 3, the plaintiff's attached Eul was requested by the FF Development Chairperson G to newly construct and use the building jointly used by the village residents on the land of this case at around 1980, and consented thereto. The defendant B route party constructed the building on the land of this case at around 1982 and used it as the village center. The plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the land of this case at around 198, the village center around 1998, the elderly welfare center around 204, the welfare center around 2014, the defendant B route leased the land of this case to the defendant's association of Dong C, the plaintiff's expression of intent to cancel the land of this case's loan.
According to the above facts, since the use, profit-making, use, and profit-making period of the instant land according to the purpose of the loan for use has expired, it is legitimate that the Plaintiff terminated the loan for use with Defendant B’s party for this reason.
Defendant.