beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff completed the marriage report with Defendant B on September 14, 201, and resided in the real estate listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant apartment”) together with Defendant C and the Plaintiff’s children, who were Defendant B and Defendant B, from July 2011.
B. On March 31, 2013, the Plaintiff was trying to dispute with Defendant B in the instant apartment, and went away from the Defendants by verbal abuse and abusive language. On April 1, 2013, the Defendants did not open the door, but did not want to return the Plaintiff’s request.
C. On April 12, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim for divorce and consolation money against Defendant B (Seoul Family Court 2014Dhap4477), and Defendant B filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff, such as divorce and consolation money (Seoul Family Court 2014Dhap4484). On March 25, 2015, the Seoul Family Court rendered a judgment to the effect that “The Plaintiff and Defendant B were divorced by a counterclaim, and the Plaintiff would pay consolation money of KRW 20,000,000 to Defendant B.”
Although the Plaintiff filed an appeal against this, on November 5, 2015, the appeal was dismissed (Seoul High Court 2015Reu1079 (Mains), 2015Reu1086 (Counterclaim)). The Plaintiff filed a second appeal, but on March 10, 2016, the appeal was dismissed.
【Supreme Court Decision 2015Meu4311 (principal lawsuit), and 2015Meu4328 (Counterclaim)】
The Defendants left the apartment site of this case on December 20, 2017. The Defendants collected and removed all of them.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 8 (part), 17, 19, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 15 through 18, 21 and 22 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the appraisal of rent by E by the appraiser of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the claim for delivery of real estate
A. The Plaintiff asserted 1 on April 7, 2013, the Defendants left the instant apartment on their own as well as the instant apartment on their own. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion was proper.