Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B apartment reconstruction project partnership is paid KRW 3,395,170 from C.
Reasons
1. The facts following the facts do not conflict between the parties, or found in Gap evidence No. 1 by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings.
Attached Form
On April 22, 2010, the registration of initial ownership was completed on April 3, 2010 with respect to the mentioned buildings (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and the registration of commencement of auction was completed on May 31, 2010 upon the application for compulsory auction by the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund, and the entry was completed on the same day, and the decision to commence auction was completed on September 7, 2010 upon the application for voluntary auction by one bank, a stock company, a collateral security (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and the entry was completed on September 8, 2010.
B. In the above auction procedure, the Plaintiff won the instant apartment at a successful bid and paid the price on November 30, 201.
C. The Defendants occupy the apartment of this case.
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendants who possess the apartment of this case are obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner unless they prove the source of possession right, and to return the unjust enrichment from possession, or to compensate for damages.
3. Determination as to the defendants' right of retention defense
A. The defendants' defenses are defenses that the lien holder of the apartment of this case has the right to possess the apartment of this case.
나. 유치권의 성부에 관한 판단 (1) 피고 B아파트재건축정비사업조합(이하 ‘피고 조합’으로 줄여 쓴다)에 대하여 ㈎ 살피건대 갑2호증, 갑6호증의 1, 갑7호증의 1, 2, 갑8호증의 1, 을가1 내지 4호증, 을가5호증의 1, 2, 을나5, 7호증의 각 기재 또는 영상에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 안양시 만안구 D 일대의 공동주택인 B 아파트를 철거하여 그 대지에 새로운 공동주택 15동을 신축하는 재건축사업을 위한 도시 및 주거환경정비법상의 주택재건축정비사업조합인 피고 조합은 2006. 7. 31.경 피고 현대산업개발 주식회사(이하 ‘피고 회사’로 줄여 쓴다)와...