logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.12.24 2014나34729
건물명도
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. Basic facts

A. On November 17, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate security trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with the non-party Malim Business Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Malim”) on the whole of the 4th underground floors and the apartment-type factory building of the 20th apartment-type complex on the ground, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, the counter-party 146-8, Sungnam-gu, the Sungnam-gu, the Sungnam-gu, the counter-party 1, including the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On November 25, 2010, the Forest Business completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the instant trust contract to the Plaintiff at the same time with the registration of ownership preservation on the instant real estate.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant occupies the instant real estate before November 25, 2010.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant, the possessor of the real estate of this case, has a duty to deliver the above real estate to the plaintiff, and the defendant also has a duty to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent acquired in the possession and use of the real estate of this case.

Furthermore, according to the results of the appraisal of rent for appraiser B at the court of first instance as to the scope of unjust enrichment, the rent for the instant real estate from November 25, 2010 to November 24, 2013 is 3,630,000 won in total, and the rent for the period from November 25, 2013 to January 23, 2014 is 834,245 in each month, and the rent for the subsequent month is confirmed to be equivalent to the above amount. Thus, the Defendant, as unjust enrichment, is confirmed to be unjust enrichment, as the Plaintiff: ① KRW 36,30,000 in each of the instant claims and the rate of delay damages from March 19, 2014 to November 28, 2014 as the following day of the application for the alteration of the purport of the instant claim and the cause of the claim; ② the rate of delay damages from March 28, 2014 to 2015.

arrow