beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing the summary in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional matters to be determined
A. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the removal of the place of business within the zone is a condition for the execution of the procedure for ownership transfer registration, and that the removal of the existing place of business within the zone in each of the contracts for sale in lots (No. 1-5) of each of the land in this case is not stipulated as a condition for the execution of the procedure for ownership transfer registration of each of the land in this case, and that the contents of each land use performance note (No. 1-3) submitted by the defendant cannot be the ground for deeming the existing removal of the place of business within the zone as the above condition.
However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 8, 9, and 10, the defendant submitted a voluntary removal performance letter to the defendant around June 2007 that "if multiple buyers fail to perform the removal of the existing place of business in the zone D, the defendant will not raise any objection even if the request for the removal of ownership registration, etc. is restricted in connection with the zone B; ② even in the inter-consembing meeting between the defendant and the number of buyers held on January 11, 2008, the defendant notified the buyers including I to remove the existing place of business until the end of January 2008; ③ the defendant notified buyers including I of the implementation of the procedure for the transfer registration of ownership in the zone B, and the defendant can recognize the fact that on March 23, 2009, the sale registration certificate, which is the need for the removal of the existing place of business, can be issued.
In the above facts, the defendant is the main center of the waste recycling companies classified as the city center non-facilities and the environment-low business.