logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.09.18 2019나14487
소유권말소등기
Text

All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as follows: (a) the Plaintiffs’ assertion added or emphasized while filing an appeal is identical to the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination of additional or pursuant to paragraph (3); and (b) such assertion includes summary language pursuant to the main sentence of Article 4

(The remaining grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs are identical to the allegations in the judgment of the court of first instance, and fact-finding and decision of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate).

A. A septic tank, water supply and drainage pipe, etc. used in the instant aggregate building (hereinafter “sanct, etc.”) constitutes a constituent part of the instant aggregate building.

Therefore, since the land in this case where a septic tank, etc. is located falls under the “site of a building” under Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Aggregate Buildings Act, it constitutes a violation of the prohibition of separate disposal under Article 20 of the Aggregate Buildings Act to dispose of only the land in this case to Defendant Q separate from the section

(The plaintiff alleged that the land in this case was a accessory to the aggregate building in the first instance court, but the above argument was changed in the trial.

The non-party E, the father of the defendant D, actively participated in Q Q through AM, such as actively acquiring and gathering them, thereby purchasing the land of this case sold to the non-party AG. The sales contract of this case is invalid as anti-social legal act.

3. Additional determination

A. We first examine whether the separation disposition of the instant land violates Article 20 of the Aggregate Buildings Act, and first examine whether the instant land constitutes a site under the Aggregate Buildings Act.

The term "section for exclusive use" under the Aggregate Buildings Act refers to the section of the building which is the object of sectional ownership (Article 2 subparagraph 3 of the Aggregate Buildings Act), and the term "section for common use" means the section of the building which is not the section for exclusive use, the accessory to the building not belonging to the section for exclusive use, and the accessory to the section for common use pursuant

arrow