logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.08 2015나2041037
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Defendant was the owner of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “instant site”) and the three-story multi-household multi-family housing (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) with three floors of reinforced concrete structure on the ground.

Of the instant land, approximately 38.12 square meters of the instant land, excluding the part on which the instant building is located, was used as part of the current road with a width of about 6 meters. However, the said location is generally the same as the part indicated as the current road 1 among the forests below.

(hereinafter “Road Part”. Part of the D Site abutting on the instant site was used as a present condition, and its location is the same as the part indicated as “road 2” among the following forests.

Part of the E site adjacent to the instant site was used as the current status, and its location is the same as the part indicated as the current status three among the following forests:

Residents of the F site and G site buildings adjacent to the instant site have been passing through the said current status roads.

On February 20, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the instant site and building from the Defendant in KRW 1 billion. Paragraph 1 of the special agreement was “the contract in the present facility status” and Paragraph 2 of the same Article “the site shall be based on the copy of the land cadastre, and the building shall be based on the size on the building ledger.”

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). At the time of the instant sales contract, the site area on the register of land was 364m2. However, in the building ledger, the site area was 325.88m2, which is the same as the value calculated by subtracting the site area of 38.12m2m2 from the site area of the said 364m2.

There were 43.86% of building-to-land ratio, 142.93m2 (=325.88m2 x 43.86%) of building area.

The Plaintiff paid the purchase price in full to the Defendant pursuant to the instant sales contract, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on April 30, 2014.

On May 9, 2014, the Plaintiff is a common house (multi-household) with a site area of 364 square meters (the site area on the register of land register), a building-to-land ratio of 59.4%, and a building area of 216.21 square meters.

arrow