logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.10.14 2020가단211534
건물인도
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver the building listed in the list (attached Form 1) to the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

[Attachment 2] The fact that there is no dispute between the parties to the claim (limited to the part corresponding to Defendant B) or may be recognized by the entry of the evidence Nos. 1-3 and 4-2, and according to each entry of the evidence Nos. 5-7, the head of Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City is 2020.

3. 23. Authorization of a management and disposal plan concerning the redevelopment and improvement project of the instant housing; and may be recognized as having been publicly notified on the same day.

According to Article 81(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), a right holder, such as the owner, superficies, persons having superficies, lease right holder, etc. of the previous land or building, shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building until the date of public announcement of transfer under Article 86 of the approval plan for the management and disposal plan (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Accordingly, if the public announcement of the approval plan for the management and disposal plan is made, the project implementer may seek against the lessee, etc. of the land or building in the rearrangement zone,

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da62561, 62578, Jul. 24, 2014). According to the foregoing findings, the housing redevelopment improvement project of this case is 2020

3. The notice of the approval plan for the management and disposal plan was given on 23. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building recorded in the list to the plaintiff as the project implementer, except in extenuating circumstances.

After the date of closing argument in this case, the Defendant submitted a reply to the effect that the Plaintiff cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim, as ① the relocation cost proposed by the Plaintiff falls short of the reasonable amount of compensation under the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor, ② the lease contract is concluded before the notice of the management and disposal plan is given.

arrow