(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.10.25 2015가단21263

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.10.25 2015가단21263

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the party’s position 1) The Plaintiff’s land B in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

2) The Defendant is the owner of the apartment house in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and the construction executor of the D apartment on the ground (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On July 31, 2012, the Defendant purchased 330/117 shares out of the instant land from the Plaintiff for KRW 180 million, and completed the registration of ownership transfer claim as to the said shares on the same day (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded the instant sales contract with the Plaintiff that “this land shall be used only for the main purpose of apartment entry, and shall be redeemed as the purchase price at the time of the violation” (hereinafter “instant special agreement”).

(2) The instant land was originally 1,177 square meters, and on December 24, 2013, 295 square meters was divided into E (hereinafter “instant land”).

3) On February 25, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant partitioned land, and thereafter the said land was offered to the site ownership of the instant apartment. C. In the process of changing the location of the apartment, according to the approval of the change of the business plan as of December 18, 2014 in the Ulsan Metropolitan City following the Defendant’s application in the process of implementing the construction project of the instant apartment to be changed, the fixed location of the said apartment was changed as in the attached forest. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in the evidence No. 1 through 5, 8, and 11, and the purport

2. Determination

A. As the fixed location of the apartment of this case, the cause of the claim was changed, the land of this case became a passage in the apartment complex rather than the main entrance road of the apartment.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to repurchase the instant partitioned land in accordance with the instant special agreement, and since the said obligation is impossible as of the date of closing argument of the instant case, the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiff for the Plaintiff’s damage caused thereby.

. The apartment of this case

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2018.08.16 2016나23977

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.08 2013가합541059

-울산지방법원 2016.04.05 2015가단53857

-수원지방법원 2016.05.17 2015구합71151

-울산지방법원 2018.06.05 2017가단65946