logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.07.08 2013가합25588
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s ownership of 5,005 square meters prior to Sungnam-si, the 1,593 square meters prior to C, the 2,046 square meters prior to D, and the E 404 square meters prior to D. (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. From November 26, 1996 to January 9, 1999, the Defendant installed road maintenance and drainage installation works in the vicinity of the instant land. During that process, around October 1998, the Defendant installed a eromatic drainage channel with a diameter of 932 meters in diameter, 37 meters in length, among the instant land. From March 12, 1999 to July 6, 199, the Defendant installed a c/ E land width of 1.84 meters in height, 1.7 meters in length, and 95 meters in length.

C. Of the instant land, the area where the above fume pipe and drain pipe are installed is 21.2 square meters, D, C, and E land totaling 188.084 square meters.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the result of on-site verification by this court, appraiser F, and G's result of each appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) although the Defendant obtained consent from the Plaintiff to use part of the land adjacent to a road constructed by the Defendant, the land of this case was set up unfairly beyond its scope, fume, and drainage way. Due to the Defendant’s tort, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 25,860,00 (the cost of removal KRW 19,007,00 for restoration to the original state), which is the sum of the cost of removing fume and drainage and restoring to the original state (the cost of restoration to the original state KRW 6,853,00 for restoration to the original state). Therefore, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the said KRW 25,860,000. 2) The Defendant occupied the Plaintiff’s land installed by installing a fume and drainage way on the instant land from January 1, 2003 to April 10, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the above KRW 10,891,00 to the plaintiff.

B. The fact that the damages claim 1 set up part of the land of this case owned by the Plaintiff, fume, and drainage.

arrow