logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017. 9. 6. 선고 2017가합44448 제11민사부 판결
소유권이전등기
Cases

2017Gahap448 Registration of transfer of ownership

Plaintiff

A Housing Association

Defendant

1. B

2. C

Conclusion of Pleadings

August 9, 2017

Imposition of Judgment

September 6, 2017

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim

Defendant B shall pay each purchase price to the Plaintiff with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 3, and each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 4 and 5, and simultaneously implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the sales contract on the following day after the date of termination of the sales agreement.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

In accordance with Article 11(1) and (2) of the Housing Act, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of establishment of a housing association from the head of the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City by securing the title to use more than 80% of the housing site area, and obtained the authorization from the head of the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the owners of land equivalent to 95.51% of the housing construction site area, and secured the usage right. On June 15, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for the approval of the housing construction project plan with the head of Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan Metropolitan City. As such, the Defendants holding each real estate listed in the

2. Determination

According to Article 22 (1) of the Housing Act, if a project proprietor who has obtained approval for a housing construction project plan secures more than 95 percent of the area of the permanent housing site, he/she may request all owners of the site on which he/she failed to secure usage fees to sell the site at the market price. Since the Plaintiff is a person who has not obtained approval for the project plan until the date of closing argument in this case, the Plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for the said claim for sale. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim in

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is without merit, and all of them are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges

Judge Cho Jae-man

Judges Yoon So-hee

Judges Lee Jong-han

Site of separate sheet

A person shall be appointed.

arrow