logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.10.25 2019나33153
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. All appeals filed by Defendant B and Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) C are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal as to the principal lawsuit are assessed against the defendant B.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is that “The video of evidence No. 3” of No. 5 of the 11 of the judgment of the court of first instance is cited as “each video of the evidence No. 3, 10, 11, and 12 (including each number number),” and the following additional judgment is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following additional judgment, this is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendants asserted 1) The Defendants invested in the equipment equivalent to KRW 70 million in order to install soundproof walls, etc., and thereby exercise the Plaintiff’s right to purchase the attached property. As such, the Defendants exercised the Plaintiff’s right to purchase the attached property. The Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real property to the Plaintiff at the same time when receiving the purchase price from the Plaintiff. 2) The Plaintiff intentionally neglected the outer wall of the instant building and interfered with the opportunity to collect the premium of the instant real estate from a third party, so the Plaintiff’s act constitutes a tort against Defendant C, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Defendant C damages, KRW 1.6 million, and delay damages.

B. 1) Determination of the claim for the right to purchase the attached object is that the lessee of the building may request the lessor to purchase the leased object and the attached object purchased from the lessor with the consent of the lessor for the convenience of use at the time of termination of the lease (Article 646 of the Civil Act). Since Article 646 of the Civil Act provides that the attached object belongs to the lessee’s ownership as the attached object of the building, and it does not constitute a part of the building and does not constitute an objective convenience for the use of the building, the leased object is solely the object attached

arrow