(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.01.16 2014가단9878

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) 의정부지방법원 2015.01.16 2014가단9878

토지인도 등

Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B indicated in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Republic of Korea completed the registration of initial ownership on August 22, 1995 on the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) The Plaintiff, etc. filed a lawsuit against the Republic of Korea seeking cancellation of registration of ownership preservation in the name of the Republic of Korea on the instant land as the District Court Decision 2010Ga2845, and the said registration of ownership preservation in the name of the Republic of Korea was cancelled on May 8, 2013 pursuant to a final and conclusive judgment stating that registration of ownership preservation should be cancelled.

(3) On August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff filed for registration of ownership preservation on the share of 7/8 out of the instant land.

B. Defendant B is the owner of a building on the ground bricks and prefabricated-styled building (a) on the part of 178 square meters in the ship connected each point of the attached Form Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 1 of the land in the instant case (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. Defendant B leased part of the instant building to Defendant C, and occupied, uses, and benefits from, the instant building and land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 1, each entry of Eul evidence 1, appraiser D's results of each appraisal, the purport of whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, Defendant B is obligated to remove the instant building and deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff, unless it proves that the Plaintiff had a legitimate title to occupy the instant land, as an act of preserving jointly-owned property, and Defendant C has a duty to withdraw the instant building, and Defendant C has a duty to withdraw from the instant building.

B. As to Defendant B’s assertion, Defendant B entered into a loan agreement on the instant land and paid rent, Defendant B’s assertion to the effect that there was a legitimate title to occupy the instant land, and thus, based on the evidence No. 2, No. 7, and No. 8.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원속초지원 2020.09.24 2020가합20097

-춘천지방법원속초지원 2020.09.24 2020가합20073

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.06.02 2016가단216907

-서울동부지방법원 2016.06.24 2015가단116620

-인천지방법원 2017.01.11 2015가단52830