logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.08.16 2016가단102390
방해배제청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B is the owner of the first floor of the building indicated in the attached Table’s real estate list (hereinafter “instant building”). Defendant C is a corporation that operates a large retailer under the trade name “D” with the entire first floor of the instant building leased from Defendant B.

On January 2, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the second floor of the instant building after being awarded a successful bid in a voluntary auction of KRW 1,390,000,000.

B. The purpose of the instant building is common areas such as electricity rooms, power generator rooms, parking lots, etc. for the use of the underground second floor, as the main complex building of the seventh and second underground floor, and the first underground floor is the camping market, Schlage, and the second floor is the use of the retail market. The first and second floors above ground are apartment complexes of the third to seventh floors above ground.

In the building of this case, there are the main entrance and the main entrance and exit of the commercial building for access to the 1st underground floor and the 1st and the 2nd underground floor, and there are four entrances that can be jointly used by apartment and commercial buildings.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On January 2, 2015, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the second floor of the building of this case could pass through the second floor of the building of this case at the time of the purchase of the second floor of the building of this case is only one of the front entrance of the building of this case. The Defendants shut down the front entrance of the commercial building of this case and the left door of the commercial building of this four entrance, and opened only the right entrance of the commercial building of this case. However, the Plaintiff is prevented from entering the second floor through this.

Therefore, the plaintiff requested the defendants to open the main entrance and the left door of the commercial building several times, and to secure the passage way to the second floor through the central and the right door of the commercial building, but the defendants rejected all of them.

The Plaintiff purchased the second floor of the instant building.

arrow