209Na 18127(d) Removal of a building

209Na28544(Counterclaim)

A

B

Suwon District Court Decision 2008Gadan46001 Decided June 25, 2009

April 2, 2010

April 23, 2010

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff’s primary and conjunctive counterclaim filed at the trial is dismissed. 3. The costs of appeal and the costs of the counterclaim are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

가. 본소.. 피고(반소원고, 이하 '피고'라 한다.)는 원고(반소피고, 이하 '원고'라 한다.)에게, 별지 기재 부동산 중, 별지 도면 표시 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 56, 7의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 리 부분 91.0㎡ 및 별지 도면 표시 27, 26, 56, 55, 27의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㅋ 부분 10.0m(위 ㄹ, ㅋ 부분은 제1심 판시 별지 도면 표시 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 27, 26, 56, 7의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 리 부분 101.0m²와 같다.) 지상 콘크리트 포장의 통로 및 마당, 별지 도면 표시 9, 10, 41, 9의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 비 부분 2.0m 지상 건물, 별지 도면 표시 30, 29, 57, 58, 30의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㅊ 부분 3.0m 지하 플라스틱 주름하수관 배수로를 철거하고, 위 토지 부분을 인도하고, 6,642,960원 및 이에 대한 이 사건 본소장 부본 송달 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20%의 비율에 의한 금원을 지급하라.

B. Counterclaim (the defendant raised a counterclaim in the first instance)

1) From among the real estate stated in the attached Form 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 7, the part of the ship connecting each point of which is indicated in the attached Form 7, 8, 44, 41, 41, 41, and 10 in sequence among the real estate listed in the attached Form 7, 8, 44, 45, 11, 45, and 10, the part of the ship connecting each point of which is indicated in the attached Form 7, 45, 12, 13, 14, 49, and 12 shall not interfere with the passage of the surrounding land.

2) The conjunctive claimant confirmed that the part of the ancillary claim connects each point of 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 8 in sequence, among the real estate listed in the attached Form No. 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 12, 49, 13, 14, 54, 55, 56, 54, 56, and 8 in sequence, among the real estate listed in the attached Form No. 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 12, 10, 13, 14, 41, 41, and 10, the plaintiff's right of passage to the surrounding part of the land is not interfered with the defendant's right of passage to the surrounding part of the land.

2. Purport of appeal

Of the real estate stated in the attached Form 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 7, among the real estate stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the request for removal of the above part of the ground building and the request for partial delivery of the above part of the land, which connects each point of 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 54, 55, 56, and 9, the passage and ma of the above part of the ground concrete package, which connect each point

1. Scope of adjudication;

별지 기재 부동산 중 별지 도면 표시 27, 26, 56, 55, 27의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㅋ 부분 10.0㎡ 지상 콘크리트 포장의 통로 및 마당, 별지 도면 표시 30, 29, 57, 58, 30의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 치 부분 3.0m 지하 플라스틱 주름하수관 배수로의 철거청구 및 위 토지 부분 인도청구와 금원지급청구에 관한 본소 청구 부분을 인용한 제1심판결에 대하여 피고가 항소하지 아니 하였으므로 위 본소 청구 부분은 심판대상에서 제외한다.

2. Basic facts

The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 5-2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3-1 through 7, Eul evidence 6-9, each on-site verification results of the first instance court and the party, and the whole purport of each on-site verification result of each on-site verification with regard to appraiser C.

A. On September 17, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the "land of this case"). On February 10, 2006, the Defendant purchased D large 430 square meters adjacent to the above land, and two-story farming houses of reinforced concrete structure sloping roof (hereinafter referred to as "ship") and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the above D land on May 26, 2006, and with respect to the industrial complex building on January 4, 2009.

나. 원고 소유의 이 사건 토지 중, 별지 도면 표시 7, 8, 44, 41, 45, 11, 12, 49, 14, 15, 31, 53, 54, 55, 56, 7의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㄹ 부분 91.0m² 및 별지 도면 표시 27, 26, 56, 55, 27 의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㅋ 부분 10.0m 위에는 콘크리트 포장의 통로 및 마당이, 별지 도면 표시 8, 9, 41, 44, 8의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 그 부분 3.0m 위에는 잔디가 식재된 마당 등이, 별지 도면 표시 9, 10, 41, 9의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 비 부분 2.0m 위에는 경계를 넘어선 피고 소유의 계쟁건물 일부가, 별지 도면 표시 10, 11, 45, 41, 10의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 시 부분 2.0m 위에는 철쭉이 식재된 화단이, 별지 도면 표시 12, 13, 14, 49, 12의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 이 부분 2.0m 위에는 장미가 식재된 화단이 설치되어 있고, 피고는 위 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, ㅅ, ㅇ, ㅋ 부분을 공로에 이르는 통로나 계쟁건물의 부지 등으로 점유·사용하여 왔다(피고가 이 사건 토지를 점유하는 면적은 위 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, ㅅ, ㅇ, ㅋ 부분을 포함하여 합계 311.0m에 이른다).

3. Determination as to the part above in the main lawsuit

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the above part of the land of this case to the plaintiff and deliver the above part of the land to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim seeking removal and delivery of the site against the part of the defendant's building constructed with a boundary of 2.0 square meters over the land of this case constitutes abuse of rights and thus, it cannot be allowed.

For the purpose of exercising a right to be an abuse of right, a subjective purpose of the exercise of right must be to inflict pain and damage on the other party, and there should be no benefit to the person who exercises the right. In an objective view, the exercise of the right should be deemed to be in violation of social order. Unless it falls under such case, even if the loss of the other party is significantly higher than the profit that the exercise of the right has gained by the exercise of the right, such circumstance alone cannot be deemed an abuse of right (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da58173, Feb. 25, 2010).

Although considerable expenses are required to remove and construct the building in a safe way so as not to cause any defect in the building remaining after the removal, the defendant's damage after the removal is deemed to occur. However, in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence No. 4, Gap evidence No. 5-1, Gap evidence No. 6, Gap evidence No. 7-1, No. 2, Gap evidence No. 8, Gap evidence No. 9-1, No. 2, and No. 10, the defendant cannot be deemed to have rejected the plaintiff's request for sale of the above part of the building, or the plaintiff's claim for sale of the building No. 1, No. 1, No. 241, Oct. 18, 2007, after obtaining permission for alteration of a mountainous district for exclusive use for general restaurants E- 2,241 square meters, it is difficult to conclude that the plaintiff's claim for sale of the above part of the building and the ground construction No. 1, including the plaintiff's right to purchase.

4. Determination as to the parts of the main lawsuit 4 and the counterclaim

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the passage and finish of the above part of the land of this case to the plaintiff, and deliver the above part of the land to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

나. 피고는, 피고에게 이 사건 토지 중 위 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅅ, 이 부분 또는 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, 이 부분(위 | 부분 지상 건물을 철거할 경우)에 관하여 주위토지통행권이 있으므로 위 ㄹ 부분 지상 통로 및 마당의 철거와 그 부지 인도청구에 응할 수 없고, 반소로써, 주위적으로는 위 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅅ, 이 부분, 예비적으로는 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, ㅅ, 이 부분에 관한 주위토지통행권확인 및 통행방해의 금지를 구한다고 주장한다.

In full view of the evidence as mentioned above and the purport of the argument in evidence Nos. 14-1, 2, and 3, the part of the land of this case, which is the land of this case, used by the defendant as a passage road from the land of this case and the passage road from the land of this case to the land of this case, and the land of this case, which is the site for a dispute building owned by the defendant, is connected to the toward the south side direction. Since the above D land of this case is directly contributed to the road of this case, it cannot be said that the defendant's access to the land of this case is impossible without passing through another person's land. Although the above D land of this case is higher than the above D land of this case and the retaining wall is installed, it cannot be said that the person's access to the surrounding land of this case is extremely difficult to be opened to the defendant with the road of this case, and when considering the damages suffered by the plaintiff by passing the land of this case, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant installed the above D land as a passage road of this case to the land of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's argument on the main lawsuit and counterclaim is without merit.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the defendant's main claim of this case and the main claim of this case filed in the trial are dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance as to the main claim of this case is legitimate, the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and the defendant's above counterclaim is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition

The mediation of judges of the presiding judge

Judges Kim Young-young

Judges Kim Jae-chul