logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.08.22 2013고정882
업무방해등
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 50.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are people who purchase a new-sold village J apartment located in the Yongsan-si District I Urban Development Project Zone.

In light of the current state of the sales market at the low price, the Defendants filed a lawsuit for termination of the contract and the claim for damages for the reason that the same soil of the apartment construction business chain (main owner) at the time of the sale advertisement did not perform the promise to emphasize the transmission tower after the apartment, and the appeal court is underway. The Defendants were willing to have applied for auction of the above apartment based on the adjustment decision made in the procedure of reduction of the sale price instituted against the same soil of the first buyer, and to exercise the right of retention by moving into the above apartment.

1. On November 15, 201, Defendant A: (a) forced the victim (owner) cococo asset trust (owner) to destroy lock devices installed in the entrance of the above structure that is entrusted and managed by the same soil unit; and (b) invaded into the said structure, thereby hindering the victim’s sale in lots and repair of defects; (c) around November 15, 201, Defendant A interfered with the victim’s business of repairing defects.

2. Around November 15, 2011, Defendant B: (a) forced the victim (owner) Crocco asset trust (owner) to destroy lock devices installed in the entrance of the building that was entrusted and managed by the same soil unit; and (b) invaded into the building; and (c) interfered with the victim’s sale of the building and the repair of the defects thereof.

3. On November 15, 201, the Defendant: (a) forced the victim (owner) cococo asset trust (owner) to destroy lock devices installed in the entrance of the above structure that is entrusted and managed by the same soil unit; and (b) invaded into the structure, thereby hindering the victim from selling the structure in lots and repairing the defects thereof.

4. Defendant D is the Defendant on November 12, 201.

arrow