logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.11.09 2015가단82583
공유물분할대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 13, 2009, the Seoul Northern District Court 2007Gahap24777 case (hereinafter “previous partition lawsuit”) among the co-owners of 32 lots, such as 32 lots of land in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, sentenced the plaintiffs and defendants in the previous partition of co-owned property to the following purport (hereinafter “the judgment”), and the judgment was affirmed as the withdrawal of appeal in the appellate court after remanding after going through the appellate court and the final appeal.

Based on the part possessed at the date of the closing of argument, the plaintiff group shall divide it in kind and own the specific part, and the remaining part shall be divided in kind by the defendant group according to the share, but with respect to the part divided in excess of the share of the plaintiff group as a result of the division in kind as above, the plaintiff group shall compensate for the value to each defendant group.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants were divided into two parts of land possessed respectively in the subject judgment, because they were belonging to the Plaintiff group.

C. As above, the part which the plaintiff group possesses in reality is divided in kind on the basis of the actual possession of each group, and the defendant group was more deficient than the plaintiff group in common in the form of sharing than the original share of the plaintiff group.

Therefore, in order to collect the shortage from the defendant group in the form of price compensation, the judgment was sentenced that the plaintiff group should pay the amount equivalent to the shortage to each defendant group jointly and severally with "each person", i.e., joint and several liability.

In order to calculate the value of the shortage, as shown in the attached Table 5, the judgment has been originally owned with the value of the part that was divided by the group of plaintiffs in kind (the "value of the divided part" in the attached Table 5).

arrow