logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.10.23 2018가단506723
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B received 886,460,000 won from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, set forth in attached Table 1.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a regional housing association established to implement a new apartment construction project with a scale of 764 households on the ground of 46,800 square meters on the land of 58 square meters in Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, and 46,800 square meters (hereinafter “instant project”).

Defendant B is a person who owns the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table included in the instant project site, and Defendant C is a person who owns the real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table included in the instant project site.

B. The Plaintiff obtained authorization to establish an association on January 18, 2017 in order to implement a new apartment construction project with a scale of 764 households on the ground of 58 square meters, 46,800 square meters, including the real estate of the said Defendants, on the land of Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, including the said Defendants’ real estate, and continues to implement the instant project in the instant project site after obtaining approval for the instant project plan on December 29, 2017.

C. The Plaintiff secured a right to use 44,588.5 square meters (95.27%) among 46,800 square meters of the instant business site.

As of September 14, 2018, a reasonable market price that reflects development gains is KRW 886,460,00,00 for real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table, and KRW 167,640,000 for real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the same Table, as of September 14, 201.

(hereinafter referred to as "land in this case" for convenience when the above real estate is collectively referred to as "the aforementioned real estate"

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Since the Plaintiff, a regional housing association, secured the right to use more than 95% of the instant project site, the Plaintiff may request the Defendants, the owner of the site for which the right to use was not secured under Article 22 of the Housing Act, to sell each of the instant real estate at the market price.

(b) Whether a project operator has completed a consultation for three months prior to a request for sale or not under Article 18-2 (1) of the former Housing Act (the same shall apply to Article 22 (1) of the current Housing Act) shall be construed as "a project operator who has obtained approval of a project plan pursuant to Article 16 (4) 1 of the former Housing Act" as a site (including buildings) for which he/she has failed to secure a

arrow