logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.07.10 2018가단35253
공사대금등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached list of real estate, and the Defendant is the owner of the land indicated in Paragraph (2) of the same

B. The land owned by the Plaintiff and the land owned by the Defendant are adjoining to each other, as indicated in the separate sheet, and the boundary is with a fence of about 1.5 meters high, about 10 meters high, about 55cm high, and about 1m high, and about 1m high.

C. On the land owned by the Plaintiff, light steel-frames, steel-frames, and prefabricated Council-style buildings (uses: retail stores and offices) are constructed, and the rear side of the said building is located on the boundary of the land owned by the original Defendant.

On the land owned by the defendant, the prefabricated-type frame and the panel roof are built of a single-story house (the purpose of use is changed to neighborhood living facilities).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3 evidence, Gap 20 evidence-2, 3, Eul 1 through 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As of the Plaintiff’s assertion, brins and steel brins set up on the boundary of the land owned by the Defendant are old and worn out, and are low in height, it is necessary to prevent them since the fallen leaves of lost trees and the falls of fallens and slopings around the Defendant, and since a lot of land is a major part of a lot of land, it is necessary to install a unified fence, such as a material, height, and shape as well as a retaining wall wall installed on the boundary of the land owned by the Plaintiff in around 2006 for permanent use as a boundary mark.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 237 of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff may require the Defendant to install a retaining wall, such as the attached “the installation level of a retaining wall’s wall size and material.” As such, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,114,700 corresponding to the aforementioned installation cost of the wall, and remove a board of length of approximately 2,600 meters on the line, which connects each point of the 1/2 of the aforementioned installation cost of the wall, to allow the passage of heavy equipment necessary for the aforementioned installation work.

arrow