logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.05.29 2017가단17657
건물인도
Text

1. The Defendants shall leave the Plaintiff from the building stated in the attached list No. 2.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts of recognition are not disputed between the parties, or may be admitted in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5, taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings:

After acquiring ownership of the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) through the auction procedure for the sale of D real estate, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against E, who was the owner of the building listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2 of the above land on the ground (hereinafter “instant building”), as the court 2014Gadan28168.

B. On August 18, 2015, this Court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “The Plaintiff shall remove the instant building, E shall remove the instant land, deliver the instant land, and pay KRW 434,400 each month from August 5, 2014 to the completion date of delivery of the instant land,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

C. After the judgment became final and conclusive, on October 12, 2016, the registration of ownership transfer for the instant building was completed on the grounds of “sale due to compulsory auction on September 26, 2016.” On the same day, G and H on September 26, 2016, each registration of ownership transfer for 1/2 shares was completed on the grounds of “sale on September 26, 2016.” Since August 11, 2017, the registration of ownership transfer for 1/2 shares under H’s name was completed in G in the future, and the ownership of the instant building is currently owned by G.

Defendant B, after leasing the instant building from G, filed a move-in report on September 29, 2016, and resided in the instant building as of the date of closing argument of the instant case, and Defendant C completed the move-in report to the address of the instant building on August 7, 2017.

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendants, as the possessor of the building of this case, have the duty to leave the building of this case to the plaintiff.

Defendant B received assistance from G, which is an economically difficult situation, in the instant building.

arrow