logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.24 2016가단40276
건물인도등
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. 22,506,00 won and its 13,954

Reasons

1. The assertion;

A. On September 24, 2015, the Plaintiff’s assertion is the owner who acquired ownership of an apartment as indicated in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on September 24, 2015, and the Defendant occupies and uses the instant apartment after the said date without a justifiable title.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant apartment to the Plaintiff, and pay unjust enrichment from December 1, 2015 to the completion of delivery of the instant apartment, interest and delay damages therefrom.

B. On April 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant apartment was transferred to the Defendant for the purpose of distributing it to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant has the right to possess and use the apartment of this case.

2. Determination:

A. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s written evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings as to the Plaintiff’s request for extradition and unlawful gains, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the instant apartment on September 24, 2015 and the Defendant occupied and used the instant apartment from December 1, 2015 to December 1, 2015.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant apartment to the Plaintiff as long as it does not assert the legitimate title to occupy and use the instant apartment, and pay unjust enrichment, interest thereon, and damages for delay from December 1, 2015 to the completion of delivery.

On the other hand, the defendant was transferred the apartment of this case from the plaintiff around April 2015 for the purpose of distributing dividends, but it is not sufficient to recognize such transfer only with the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 16 (including the serial number), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, this argument by the defendant cannot be accepted.

B. According to the result of the assessment of rent in this case, the amount of annual rent from December 1, 2015 to November 30, 2016 for the apartment of this case is KRW 13,954,00 (monthly rent is KRW 1,163,00), and the amount of monthly rent is from December 1, 2016 to November 30, 207.

arrow