(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.05.15 2019가단131937

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.05.15 2019가단131937

소유권이전등기 절차이행 청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim that secured more than 95% of the land in the instant project site in order to implement a housing construction project under the Housing Act in the Daegu North-gu Seoul Northern District (hereinafter “instant project site”).

Since the defendant who owns 1/3 shares of each of the real estate in the project site of this case does not comply with the agreement on the sale and purchase of each of the above real estate, the plaintiff shall exercise the right to demand sale pursuant to Article 22(1) of the Housing Act by serving a copy of the complaint

Therefore, at the same time, the Defendant received KRW 49,573,703 from the Plaintiff as the purchase price equivalent to the market price, and at the same time, performed the procedures for the registration of share ownership transfer on the grounds of sale on the date of delivery of the copy of each complaint of this case, while no provisional seizure is registered with respect to each one-third of the real estate of this case.

2. According to Article 22 of the Housing Act, a project proprietor who has obtained approval for a housing construction project plan pursuant to Article 21(1)1 may request the owner of a site for which he/she fails to secure a title to use (including buildings) among the relevant housing construction sites to sell the site at the market price. In such cases, he/she shall consult with the owner of the site subject to such request for sale for at least three months in advance.

Therefore, a person who can exercise the right to demand sale under Article 22 of the Housing Act is limited to "project operator who has obtained approval for the housing construction project plan pursuant to Article 21 (1) 1 of the Housing Act"

Since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff obtained approval for the said housing construction project plan, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit without further review.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

참조조문

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2020.03.20 2019가단132015

-대구지방법원 2019.12.05 2019가합207770

-대구지방법원서부지원 2020.05.19 2019가단65983

-대구지방법원 2020.01.22 2019가단107842