(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.12.14 2015가단9878

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.12.14 2015가단9878

건물인도

Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From February 25, 2015, the foregoing.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”), and the Defendants occupy and use the instant building with the vice versa.

B. On December 21, 2014, Defendant B agreed to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff by February 24, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”). C.

Meanwhile, the monthly rent for the instant building is KRW 765,00 in 2015 and 2016, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, result of appraiser D's appraisal of rent, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants occupied and used the instant building owned by the Plaintiff, and in particular, Defendant B agreed to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff by February 24, 2015. The monthly rent of the instant building is KRW 765,00 in 2013 and 2014, and the subsequent monthly rent is also the same amount. Thus, barring any other special circumstances, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 765,00 in 765,00 in the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from February 25, 2014 to the completion of the delivery.

B. The defendants' assertion (1) is alleged to the effect that E occupies the building of this case as the lien holder who did not receive the construction cost, and the defendants succeeded to his right of possession from E, and that E exercises the right of retention through the defendants. Thus, although E cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim before receiving the construction cost, it is not sufficient to acknowledge it even if considering the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 and the witness E's testimony, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.

(2) Defendant B, the instant agreement, including civil action between the Plaintiff and E, lien lawsuit and criminal complaint case.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.01.19 2016가단28513

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.10.06 2015나295

-서울서부지방법원 2016.04.29 2015나5693

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.28 2013가단5149918

-서울북부지방법원 2017.12.12 2017가단108421