logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.09.18 2013나2431
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. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the claim (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with the Seoul Southern District Court on November 3, 2003 as to the building on the ground of sale and purchase on November 3, 2003 and the registration of ownership transfer with the Seoul Southern District Court on July 1, 201, and the receipt No. 31760 on July 1, 201. The fact that the Defendant occupied the instant apartment does not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by the Defendant in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of evidence No. 1, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant apartment to the Plaintiff

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership is null and void as a false declaration of conspiracy. The Defendant exercised a lien with respect to the claim for the subcontract price of the instant building against the Plaintiff’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”). The Intervenor’s representative D conspired with the Plaintiff, thereby making the Plaintiff complete the registration of ownership transfer in collusion with the Defendant to receive the instant apartment from the Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is without merit.

In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement of evidence Nos. 2 (No. 3), evidence No. 3, evidence No. 1 (No. 10), and evidence No. 6, the intervenor, upon being awarded a contract from the F apartment reconstruction association for construction of the building of this case from the intervenor, was entitled to the payment of part of the building of this case as substitute, on the ground that the plaintiff, E, etc. purchased part of the building of this case from the intervenor, the intervenor filed a lawsuit for the registration of ownership transfer against the co-owners, etc. of the building of this case as Seoul Southern District Court No. 2007Gahap7936, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the apartment of this case as to the apartment of this case with the intervenor, and Eul filed a lawsuit for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the apartment of this case as to 102

arrow