logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.01.24 2017나2029260
소유권이전등기 등
Text

1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim extended by this court, shall be modified as follows.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an association established to implement a housing reconstruction improvement project (hereinafter “instant project”) under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

The head of Mapo-gu announced the plaintiff on January 22, 2009, the project implementation authorization on December 1, 2015, the project implementation authorization on September 9, 2016, and the management and disposal plan on September 13, 2016.

B. The Defendant consented to the establishment of the Plaintiff as the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet located in the instant project zone (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

C. On December 22, 2015, the Plaintiff publicly announced the period of application for parcelling-out to the members for parcelling-out from December 28, 2015 to February 2, 2016, and announced the extension of the period of application for parcelling-out to February 3, 2016, which extended the period of application for parcelling-out to February 22, 2016, and the Defendant did not apply for parcelling-out to the Plaintiff by the expiration date of the above period of application for parcelling-out.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Gap evidence 7-4 and 5 (hereinafter referred to as "numbers") and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the cause of claim - Where a member of a sales contract established becomes subject to cash liquidation as he falls under the conditions prescribed by the Urban Improvement Act and the articles of association of the association, such as failing to apply for parcelling-out or withdrawing an application for parcelling-out, a reconstruction association may apply mutatis mutandis the provisions of the Act on Urban Improvement for Claim for Sale to a person subject to cash liquidation

In such cases, the time when the obligation to pay the settlement money occurs to a person subject to cash settlement and the base time for assessing the value of land, buildings or other rights subject to cash settlement shall be determined by the project implementer, except in extenuating circumstances.

arrow