logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.05.24 2016나1180
건물철거 및 토지인도
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance concerning the instant case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Attachment] The second 12nd 12nd 2nd 5th 2015nd 5th 2015nd 5th 2014th 5th 2014

[Additional Parts] Even if the title trust of the building of this case was held by H to I who is the son of the defendant, as alleged by the defendant in the fourth 7th 7th son, the truster cannot assert that the building is owned by the third party, and therefore, it is not possible to acquire legal superficies on the premise that the building and the land which are the building site are owned by the same person, in case where the title trust was held to another person on the register of the building.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da29043 delivered on February 13, 2004, etc.). Meanwhile, the defendant argued that H gave I a written consent to use the building on the land of this case and thus the defendant also acquired legal superficies. However, the defendant does not prove that H consented I to use the land of this case, and there is no proof as to the scope of the consent. Further, the consent to use the land for the construction of the land of the landowner cannot be deemed as the creation of superficies or the creation of customary superficies. Thus, the defendant's argument does not seem to have any reason.

(Supreme Court Decision 79Da438 delivered on June 12, 1979)

2. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claim should be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning. The judgment of the court of first instance is justified on the grounds of its conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow