beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B, among the 384m2 in Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D, 1, indicated in attached Form 11, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 29, 2013, Kuyang-gu, Yangyang-gu D (hereinafter “instant land”) purchased the ownership transfer registration on October 31 of the same year after purchasing it in a voluntary auction procedure on August 29, 2013, and subsequently, the Plaintiff purchased it from E on January 5, 2016, and completed the registration of ownership transfer.
B. From April 29, 2015, Defendant B owned a building not yet registered on the ground (hereinafter “instant building”) with the indication of drawings (iv) of the attached Form 2 among the instant land from April 29, 201, and occupied the area of 287 square meters in the attached Form 3 drawings. From around 2001, Defendant C owned a non-registered building on the part of the instant land and its septic tank lids, etc. (hereinafter “instant building”) with the indication of drawings 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 97 square meters in the same drawings.
C. The rent from April 29, 2015 (the acquisition date of the first building ownership of Defendant B) to January 4, 2016 is KRW 18,291,517, the rent from January 5, 2016 (the acquisition date of the Plaintiff’s ownership) to May 1, 2016, is KRW 8,59,199, and the rent from May 2, 2016, is KRW 72,874, a day.
In addition, the rent from August 29, 2013 to January 4, 2016, is KRW 21,005,465, the rent from January 5, 2016 to May 1, 2016, is KRW 2,906,285, and the rent from May 2, 2016, is KRW 24,629,00,000,000,000,000 from May 2, 2016.
On the other hand, the former owner E sold the instant land to the Plaintiff on January 5, 2016, and transferred both the Defendants’ unjust enrichment return claim to the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, Defendant B removed the building of this case, and Defendant B removed the building of this case, and 287 square meters in attached Form 3.