beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B’s appraisal of the land listed in Section 1 of the Attached List No. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 28, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the restoration of real name as to each land listed in the separate sheet.
B. Defendant B owned the house indicated in Section 1-A of the Disposition No. 1 on the ground of the land listed in the attached list No. 1, and occupied the part indicated in Section 1-A of the above land.
C. Defendant C owns the house listed in Section 1-B of the Disposition on the ground of the land listed in the attached list No. 2, and occupies the part indicated in Section 1-B of the Disposition among the above land.
Defendant D leased and occupied and used the above house from Defendant C.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1-5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. The Plaintiff seeking the removal of interference as the owner of each of the instant lands in determining the cause of the claim, and Defendant B and C have the obligation to deliver the pertinent part of the land which is occupied by the removal and possession of each of the instant lands, and Defendant D has the obligation to withdraw from the pertinent housing.
B. Defendant B’s assertion, etc. is asserted by the Defendants. Defendant B’s assertion that he was aware of the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 as owned by the State and owned, occupied, and used part thereof, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. However, even if Defendant B knew that it was owned by the State, this cannot be set up against the Plaintiff, a real owner, and thus, Defendant C’s assertion is without merit. 2) Defendant C and D’s defense of the prescription period for acquisition of possession of land from E on October 8, 197, purchased from E on October 8, 1997, the part indicated in paragraph (b) of the attached Table No. 1 of the Disposition No. 2 (hereinafter “instant land”). From that time, Defendant C purchased the land from E, and acquired it by prescription on October 8, 2017 after the lapse of 20 years.
Defendant C intended to purchase the purchase price of KRW 12,00,000 for E and the instant land on October 8, 1997.