(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.12.20 2016가합4906

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) 전주지방법원 2017.12.20 2016가합4906

수목 등 소유권확인

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 20, 2006, the Defendant purchased each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”) from I, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 3, 2006, and is the owner of each land of this case. From around around 1998, the Plaintiff resided in G in Kim Jong-si and managed trees planted on each land of this case.

B. Even after acquiring the ownership of each of the instant lands, the Defendant: (a) managed the trees planted on each of the instant lands through J; (b) around March 30, 2009, the Plaintiff: (c) demanded the Plaintiff to refrain from shipping out part of the trees on each of the instant lands; and (d) around March 30, 2009, the Plaintiff demanded the Plaintiff to refrain from shipping out without permission; and (c) on April 3, 2009, the Plaintiff prepared a letter (Evidence B) stating that “The Plaintiff would have cultivated the instant land to J only for a gold year and will not thereafter manage them.”

C. However, around November 15, 2016, the Plaintiff intended to re-enter part of the trees planted on the ground of each of the instant lands. Accordingly, on November 21, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content demanding the Plaintiff to restore the said trees to their original state by November 30, 2016, and the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant seeking that the trees on the ground of each of the instant lands are owned by himself as stated in the purport of the claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, 5 (including branch numbers in case of each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 5, Gap evidence 2 and 6, the video and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The land of this case was managed by L in the line of the K door, and the Plaintiff from around 198 to the point of view of the claim, and the land of this case (hereinafter “each item of this case”).

A. B. This case

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.09.03 2014가단29681

-대전지방법원천안지원 2014.06.20 2014가합782

-전주지방법원 2014.04.23 2013가단27406

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2017.02.17 2016가단8154

-수원지방법원평택지원 2016.07.12 2015가단15783