logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.04.20 2016가단33243
건물명도
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: The real estate listed in the Schedule No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall be listed in the attached Table 2.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association that has obtained authorization for the establishment of a partnership under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

B. The head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government approved the management and disposal plan on February 25, 2016 on the housing redevelopment improvement project implemented by the Plaintiff, and announced it around that time.

C. Defendant B owns the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1; Defendant C is the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2; Defendant D is the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 4; Defendant E is the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 5; Defendant F is the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 7; each of the above real estate is within the Plaintiff’s project implementation area

The Defendants are both subjects of cash settlement. The Plaintiff consulted with the owners of real estate in the project area including the Defendants, but did not reach an agreement on the acquisition of such real estate due to the reasons such as compensation, etc., the Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee. Accordingly, on October 28, 2016, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling of expropriation on December 16, 2016 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”).

On December 14, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 403,102,040 against Defendant B, KRW 431,582,690 against Defendant C, KRW 503,721,130 against Defendant D, KRW 693,423,720 against Defendant E, and KRW 221,013,010 against Defendant F.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence No. 5-1 through 5, 7, Gap evidence No. 7, Gap evidence No. 8-1 through 7, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Where the approval of a management and disposal plan prescribed in Article 49(3) of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claims is publicly notified, the previous land or structures shall be made pursuant to the main sentence of Article 49(6).

arrow