logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2015.09.02 2014가단11332
건물명도 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is the third floor of 379.8 square meters among the buildings listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall list attached hereto.

Reasons

1. In full view of the entries in Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claim for delivery of a building, the defendant Eul may recognize the fact that the 379.8 square meters of the building listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1 owned by the plaintiff among the buildings listed in the plaintiff's attached Table No. 1 of the same Table is possessed by the defendant Eul, the building listed in paragraph (2) of the same Table (hereinafter referred to as "each building of this case", and each building collectively referred to as "the building of this case"). Thus,

피고들 주장에 관한 판단 : ▷다음 각 주장은 갑 5 내지 10호증의 각 기재에 비추어 피고들이 제출한 증거만으로는 그 주장사실을 인정하기 부족하므로, 모두 이유 없다.

① Defendant B has a claim of KRW 1450 million against D (Lessor), E (owner of the instant building site), Oriology Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Miology Development”), and the transferee of the instant building building permit, and the former owner of the instant building), and Defendant C has a claim of KRW 150 million.

The Defendants filed a lawsuit seeking payment of the above claim under this Court 2014Gahap10541, but lost.

(Continuing the appellate court 2015Na11785). The Defendants have the right to possess the said claims from the Plaintiff who succeeded to D, E, Oral Development or its status until the said claims are paid.

② The Defendants are obligated to pay the construction cost of KRW 36 million to E.S. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A.S.C”) with respect to the subcontracted and the foregoing company, while performing the construction of the extension of the third floor of the instant building under paragraph (1) of this case.

Defendant B’s claim amounting to KRW 145 million in the above case No. 2014Gahap10541 includes the facility investment cost of KRW 110 million.

On the other hand, E.C. allows F to supply and demand the instant building construction works and to subcontract some of the construction works using its trade name and comprehensive construction licenses.

arrow