beta
Text
1. The branch court of the Daegu District Court on June 29, 2017, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, shall be the Seoul District Court.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant agreed to expropriate C-ground housing, water supply, and head trees (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant housing, etc.”) in order to perform the construction of a B-Si Urban Planning Road in Daegu-si, which is an urban planning facility project, and deposited KRW 17,688,50,00 as the Seoggu District Court Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court on June 29, 2017 by designating the deposited person as D.
(hereinafter “Deposit of this case”). (b)
The fact of the cause of deposit in the deposit document of this case is that the Daegu Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal intended to pay KRW 17,688,500 to the compensation adjudicated by expropriation, but the compensation cannot be paid due to the unknown whereabouts, etc.
C. On September 7, 1987, E, the Plaintiff’s referred, died, and the Plaintiff and the designated parties inherited E according to the shares in the attached inheritance shares.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion is referred to as “D” as the recipient of the instant deposit, it is sought to verify that the instant deposit is against the Plaintiff and the designated parties.
B. According to the records in Gap evidence No. 2, it is recognized that the address of the owner on the ordinary building ledger of the instant house is recorded C, which is different from the Plaintiff’s domicile on the Plaintiff’s resident registration card.
However, in full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 6, the fact-finding response results with respect to Fran, and the purport of the whole pleadings, it is reasonable to view that the address recorded in the above general building register is recorded as it is in the address of this case as it is, since it is recognized that the person "D" did not have any record of residing in Gri-si, Daegu-si, Daegu-si, and that there is no other person subject to the same name.
Therefore, "D" and "E", which are the subjects of the deposit of this case, shall be the same person.