logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.01.17 2017가단52390
분묘철거 등 이행청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) out of 14,083 square meters of forest C in Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun; (b)

(a) Attached Form VII 7, 8, 52, 42, 3.2;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 29, 1985, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C forest land of 14,083 square meters (hereinafter “C forest”) in New-nam-gun, New-gun, Seoul (hereinafter “Seoul forest”).

나. 피고는 일자불상경 C 임야 중 별지 도면 표시 ㅅ, ㅇ, ㅁ2, ㄹ2, ㄷ2, ㄴ2, ㄱ2, ㅎ1, ㅍ1, ㅌ1, ㅋ1, ㅊ1, ㅈ1, ㅇ1, ㅅ1, ㅂ1, ㅁ1, ㄹ1, ㅅ의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 (나) 부분 526㎡ 지상(이하 이를 ‘이 사건 토지’라 한다)에 부(父) 망 D의 분묘 1기를 설치하고, 이 사건 변론종결일 현재 이 사건 토지 전체를 점유하고 있다.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, the entry or video of Gap's evidence 1 to 7, the result of the survey and appraisal by the newly established branch of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to remove one grave installed on the ground of the instant land and deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendant for removal of one grave set up on the ground of the land of this case and delivery of the land of this case only for the purpose of causing pain to the defendant, although there is no interest to the plaintiff, and therefore, it constitutes an abuse of the right against the principle of good faith.

In order for the exercise of the right to be an abuse of the right, the objective of the exercise of the right is to inflict pain and damage on the other party, and there is no benefit to the person who exercises the right, and the exercise of the right should be objectively deemed to be contrary to the social order.

Unless it falls under this case, even if the other party suffered a loss more than the profit that the exercise of the right holder gains, the only reason is that the other party is to do so.

arrow