beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) received KRW 205,452,800 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) simultaneously.
Reasons
A principal lawsuit and a preliminary counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a regional housing association under the Housing Act established for the purpose of constructing multi-family housing of 2 underground floors and 34 stories above ground and supplying multi-family housing to the members of the association and the general buyers in the form of a regional housing association on the land of 38,047 square meters (hereinafter “instant project site”). The Defendant is the owner of each real estate in the attached list in the instant project site (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).
B. In order to operate a housing construction project, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the land owner with 96% of the instant project site and acquired ownership, and the Plaintiff obtained approval of the project plan from the original market, which was approved by the person authorized to approve the project plan on April 4, 2018 pursuant to Article 15(1) of the Housing Act.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s exercise of claim for sale
A. The relevant legal doctrine grants a project proprietor who has obtained approval for a housing construction project plan a right to demand a sale to purchase a site necessary for the housing construction project from the said owner is specifically stipulated to allow the project proprietor to deprive his/her property right against the landowner’s will in order to achieve the public interest, such as residential stability and improvement of housing level through housing construction. Therefore, the substance of the right may be deemed as the same as the public expropriation under Article 23(3) of the Constitution (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da12453, Jul. 10, 2008). As a requirement that the project proprietor must undergo prior to the exercise of the right to demand sale (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da12453, Jul. 10, 2008) and “consultation with the landowner for at least three months prior to the exercise of the right to demand sale is a procedural guarantee that
Therefore, it is true.