logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.08.09 2016가단51326
건물명도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 31, 2005, D completed registration of preservation of ownership with respect to a wooden ground, a bridge, a single-story house, 48.4 square meters (hereinafter “instant old building”) on the ground of Gangwon-do, Gangwon-do, Seoul-do, 774 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”).

B. On December 17, 2013, the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “Disposal Office”) seized the instant building, and commenced a public auction procedure on June 17, 2015.

C. The Plaintiff purchased the instant old building around November 17, 2015 in the said public sale procedure and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 1, 2015.

However, the old building was newly constructed in around 1960, and around 1998, E, who was the owner of the instant building at the time of removing the previous building, newly constructed approximately 25.4 square meters in a brine brine, a brine, brine, a brine, in the new building (hereinafter “the new building”).

E. The old building of this case and the new building of this case are separate buildings whose materials, size, structure, purpose of use, etc. are different.

F. On July 16, 2001, E sold the instant site and the instant new building to F, the Defendant’s wife, and F, on the same day, completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant site.

G. The Defendant and F occupy and use the instant new building.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7, 8, 14 to 17, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6, video, and purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the new building of this case, and the defendant occupies it without permission, so the defendant is obligated to deliver the new building of this case to the plaintiff.

B. (1) The registration of the newly constructed building cannot be deemed to be the same building as the building destroyed by the new building, even if a newly built building or destroyed building has a similar surface in its material, location, structure, or other sides.

arrow