logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.03.15 2015가단131984
건물명도
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B received 30 million won from the Plaintiff and simultaneously entered in the attached list.

Reasons

1. Determination on both arguments

A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff, who is a project executor, obtained authorization from the head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 22, 2015, and then, at that time, the details of such authorization are publicly notified (Seoul Metropolitan Government Public Notice G) and the Defendants occupy each of the relevant parts of the building among the contents of paragraph (1) of this Article by adding them to the whole purport of the pleadings between the parties, or by adding them to the whole purport of pleadings set forth in subparagraphs A and 6 (including each number)

According to these facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants whose use or profit-making has been suspended as a lessee pursuant to the public notice of the authorization of the above management and disposition plan are obligated to hand over each of the pertinent parts of the buildings possessed by the Defendants to the Plaintiff who lawfully acquired the right to use or profit-making benefits

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da62561, Jul. 24, 2014). (B)

With regard to this, the defendants asserts as follows.

(1) It is unlawful for the Plaintiff to request the delivery of each building of this case against the Defendants without going through the conference procedure of the Urban Dispute Mediation Committee, as well as without going through a consultation five times or more pursuant to the “Operation Plan of the Prior Consultative Body” submitted by the Plaintiff to the head of Jung-gu Seoul

(2) The Plaintiff is obligated to establish a "resident and relocation measures" with respect to the Plaintiff. As a part of this, the Defendants cannot comply with the Plaintiff's claim in this case unless the payment of business loss compensation amount is prior to or simultaneously performed under the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter "Public Works Act") by analogy.

If this is different from this, the Constitution is established in the light of equity with housing redevelopment projects.

arrow