logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2016.09.22 2015가합484
건물인도
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C established a medical corporation at the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) and operated the hospital, etc., the medical corporation was invested by the Defendant, etc. in order to obtain funds from the Defendant, etc., but the business was conducted due to lack of funds, and among which, upon the application of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, voluntary auction D with the Gwangju District Court on June 8, 2007 was initiated.

Accordingly, C proposed that the Defendant would establish and operate the hospital and recover the investment amount in the instant building under the name of the Defendant. On February 10, 2010, the Defendant accepted C’s proposal and was awarded 7/10 shares of the instant building during the said voluntary auction procedure, and the remaining 3/10 shares of the building was awarded by E, a type of sale by C.

The defendant and E completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 11, 2010.

B. C established a medical corporation to operate the hospital in the original building of this case, and employed F, a medical corporation as a hospital principal. However, it was difficult to establish a medical corporation due to the lack of requirements for establishment of the medical corporation, and decided to open and operate the hospital with C’s funds.

F is to receive remuneration from C while taking charge of diagnosis and treatment.

Therefore, on January 13, 2011, C installed 100 sickbeds in the instant building, other than the instant building, and installed and operated a hospital under the name of “G Hospital” in the name of “Seoul-do” in the name of “F,” after completing the report on the establishment of a medical institution.

C. C and F violated the Medical Service Act, and practically discontinued the operation of the hospital in the instant building on December 2013.

However, F continued to occupy the building in a state where security and corrective devices have been installed in the instant building.

C and F were prosecuted on November 27, 2013 as the charges of violating the Medical Service Act.

arrow