logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.10.17 2018가단108282
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 13, 201, the registration of the preservation of ownership of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) was completed on December 13, 201, and the registration of the trust of the New Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. was completed on July 16, 2012.

B. On December 14, 2017, the Plaintiff purchased the instant apartment from the New Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. and completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning the instant apartment on January 26, 2018.

C. Defendant B occupied the instant apartment from December 24, 2015, and Defendant C filed a move-in report on the instant apartment.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap's evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings (defendant B), and deemed confessions (defendant C)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner.

B. As to this, Defendant B asserted that, although Defendant B, who was entrusted with the disposition by the D Rebuilding Project Association, was entitled to dispose of the instant apartment complex at the price significantly lower than the market price, Defendant B occupied the instant apartment in place of the said reconstruction Association without the right to dispose of the instant apartment complex, Defendant B cannot be deemed to have a legitimate right to occupy the instant apartment solely on the ground that Defendant B’s assertion alone did not have a legitimate right to occupy the instant apartment by setting up against the Plaintiff, the said owner. Therefore, the above assertion by Defendant B is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow