logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원(창원) 2016.12.22 2016나22809
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with C, a broker of a licensed real estate agent C, to purchase “the building of this case” at KRW 609,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) under the ground and the third floor neighborhood living facilities and housing (hereinafter “the building of this case”) under B’s ownership at KRW 207.9 square meters and above that ground. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on October 7, 2013.

122.96 1st floor reinforced concrete building with 122.64 1st floor reinforced concrete building with 80.64 1st floor reinforced concrete building with 41.482nd floor reinforced concrete building with 41.372nd floor reinforced concrete building with 43.753rd floor reinforced concrete building with 12.12

B. At the time of the instant sales contract, the use of each floor on the real estate register and the building register on the instant building is as follows. The first floor and the second floor of the instant building were operated by the lessee H as “E” by the lessee, and H was residing in the third floor.

C. From around 2005, the above lessee had been running the restaurant business by leasing the instant building. After the Plaintiff purchased the instant building, H continued to run the said day-only store business in the instant building.

H, after the expiration of the lease term on June 26, 2015, reported to the Gu office the fact that all the 1 and 2 floors of the instant building were operated as a restaurant without permission. Accordingly, as of July 3, 2015, on the building ledger, the following indication of the building was registered on the building ledger, and the Plaintiff received a corrective order as to the violation from the head of the Gu, which was issued by the head of the Gu.

Details of a violation: Unauthorized expansion [40.48 square meters in the second class neighborhood living facilities in light of a light metal frame, 40.48 square meters in cement block, 2 square meters in the second class neighborhood living facilities in a cement block], unauthorized alteration of use [2.13 square meters in the second class neighborhood living facilities in a house (general restaurant)], and alteration of use in an attached parking lot without permission (36.0 square meters in lots).

arrow