beta
Text
1. As to KRW 26,569,460 deposited by the Defendants in Suwon District Court No. 2015 Gold 1977, Jul. 9, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendants, as a project implementer of the B business, accepted Pyeongtaek-si C’s housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) through a judgment of the Central Land Expropriation Committee pursuant to the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects.
(hereinafter “instant expropriation”). (b)
At the time of the instant expropriation, the instant house was unregistered and indicated as Nonparty D by the owner on the building ledger. On July 8, 2015, the Defendants deposited KRW 26,569,460 as compensation for losses for the instant house as the said D, the Defendant deposited KRW 26,569,460 as Suwon District Court Sejong District Court KRW 2015Hun-Ba1977.
(hereinafter “Deposit of this case”). C.
The Plaintiff resided in the instant house from around 1970 to 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 14, 15, 26 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. At the time of the death on May 11, 1969, the first senior deceased non-party D agreed that the instant house will be owned by H through the heir’s agreement on the division of inherited property, even though the heir was wife E, F, G, H, H, I, J, and K.
Since then on December 31, 1969, H had L, M, N, andO as his heir at the time of death, and these inheritors agreed on the division of inherited property owned by N solely.
Since then, in 1970, the Plaintiff purchased the instant house from G around 1970 from rice 30 Ga, and resided therein for 2016.
Ultimately, the Plaintiff is a legitimate transferee for the instant house, and is de facto owner with the right to dispose of the instant house, and is in the position to receive compensation for expropriation.
Therefore, the right to claim payment of the instant deposit ought to be vested in the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendants seek confirmation therefrom.
B. We cannot readily conclude that D and D as the depositee of the instant house are the same person.