logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.18 2018가단5041989
점유방해금지 등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiffs' respective claims against the defendants are dismissed in entirety.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The party status 1) Plaintiff B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff B”).

(2) The land of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E large scale 150 square meters (hereinafter referred to as "land") shall be specified only as a parcel number below the same.

(2) The Defendant D Co., Ltd. is a business entity that carries out the “G Housing Development Project” in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, and Defendant C Co., Ltd is a contractor that has received a contract from Defendant D Co., Ltd. for a multi-family housing construction project (hereinafter “instant construction project”) under the said project.

B. 1) H purchased the land of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from May 2, 1987, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said land on May 4, 1987. 2) Plaintiff A purchased the land of Yongsan-gu from H on January 10, 199, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the above real estate on April 23, 199.

C. On September 4, 2017, Defendant D Co., Ltd. entered into a contract for construction works with Defendant C Co., Ltd., and the instant construction works. (2) The Defendants, following a traffic impact assessment deliberation, opened an entrance to the part of J land for the entry of vehicles into the construction works. In the process, the Defendants removed part of the chemical teams installed on the said land.

[Ground of Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 6-1 through 9, Gap evidence 7-1 through 18, Gap evidence 1-1 through 5, Gap evidence 12-1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 13-1 through 7, Eul evidence 13-1, 2, Eul evidence 2-1 through 5, Eul evidence 6-1, Eul evidence 7, 8, Eul evidence 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiff Eul purchased the land E and its ground buildings from H, together with the land K, J, L and M, and part of the land M from around that time.

arrow