logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.11.22 2017가합24308
채권자대위 등 청구의 소
Text

1. Defendant B, C, D, E, G, H, I, and J concerning each real estate listed in the separate sheet among the Plaintiff’s lawsuits against Defendant A.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On May 2, 2003, Jung-gu L, M-based multi-household housing and new apartment construction works, N &O, P, Q, and R agreed on May 2, 2003 that the construction work for construction of U apartment units on the ground of 1,500 square meters in Seoul, Jung-gu L, Seoul (hereinafter “instant contract”). The construction contractor newly constructed the above apartment unit, provides the owners with the households equivalent to 100% of the existing site area and 50% of the underground area, and the remaining households agreed that the construction works will sell it in lots and cover the construction cost.

On December 1, 2003, the above land was divided into the above L 720.5 square meters and M 779.8 square meters. On February 13, 2004, the head of Jung-gu, Seoul, the owner of the building on February 13, 2004, the owner of the building was two multi-household houses with the 5th floor above L land (hereinafter “multi-household houses in this case”; the above 5 persons, including Defendant B, etc., referred to as “the owner of the building in this case”), and the owner of the building in March 9, 2004, the owner of the building in this case was N, W, X, Y, AB, AB, O, D, AE, P, R, AF, and the owner of the building in this case, referred to as “multi-household apartment buildings in this case” and the owner of the building in this case and the owner of the building in this case, each of the above 14 owners of the building in this case.

(2) On May 29, 2005, K succeeded to the contractor’s status under the instant contract (hereinafter “K, etc.”) and obtained approval for the use of the said multi-household newly constructed around September 7, 2005, when K was unable to continue to implement the construction under its name due to the revocation of the SP’s license for the construction business, and it was no longer possible for K to continue to implement the construction under its name.

K on December 2, 2005 in the name of AG.

arrow