beta
Text
1. The defendant is against the plaintiff and each land listed in the separate sheet.
(a)each point in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 1.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff purchased each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) in the instant court’s voluntary auction case, and completed the registration procedure for ownership transfer on April 27, 2015.
B. The Defendant owns each of 57 square meters out of a house located on the ground of the part of “A” on the ground of the instant land, which connects each point of the attached table Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 1 in sequence, in the order of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 6 of the same map, each of which is 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 11 of the same map on the part of “B” part of “B” on the ground of the instant land, which connects each point of 1, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 11 of the same map.
(hereinafter referred to as “A”, “B”, “C” above, “A”, “B”, “C”, and “instant housing, etc.” among the instant land, the aforementioned “A”, “B”, and “C” are collectively referred to as “the location of the instant land occupied, etc.” / [based on recognition] of absence of dispute, each entry in the evidence No. 1-1, No. 2, and evidence No. 2-1, 2, and 3, and the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by this court, the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. According to the above facts of recognition, it is recognized that the Defendant occupied and used the instant land owned by the Plaintiff without permission to own the instant housing, etc., and the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant housing, etc. to the Plaintiff and deliver the place of possession to the Plaintiff.
In addition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the property until the above removal and delivery obligation are performed. In ordinary cases, the amount of unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the property is the amount equivalent to the rent of the real property.
According to the result of this court's appraisal of rent, it can be recognized that the monthly rent of the occupation of this case after April 27, 2015 belongs to 75,050, and thereafter, it is ratified as the same amount.