logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.12.23 2015가단72883
부동산명도
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff corporation is a corporation established for the purpose of welfare projects, such as the establishment and operation of senior citizens’ facilities, and is the owner of the real estate listed in attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On August 29, 2014, the Kim Sea Mayor ordered the Plaintiff corporation to dismiss the Defendant, who is the representative director of the Plaintiff corporation, in accordance with the Social Welfare Services Act, and accordingly, the Plaintiff corporation dismissed the Defendant from the representative director on September 29, 2014.

C. The real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) over both the ground of D in the case of Kimhae-si and the Defendant owned by the Plaintiff Corporation.

The defendant occupies the building and restaurant of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the result of a request for surveying and appraisal to the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. 1) First of all, according to the above facts, the building of this case was owned by the Plaintiff corporation, and the Defendant without any title. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the Plaintiff corporation, barring any special circumstance. 2) Next, considering the overall purport of the pleadings and arguments as to the request for delivery of the instant restaurant, the instant restaurant is constructed in connection with the instant building for use as restaurant by the residents of the instant building, and the new construction funds of the instant building were paid by the Plaintiff corporation, as the ownership of the instant restaurant was acquired by the Plaintiff corporation originally, barring any special circumstance.

I would like to say.

In addition, the Defendant constructed the instant restaurant as claimed by the Defendant.

8.2

arrow