logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.11.29 2017나202631
청구이의
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant), B, D, F, G, and the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) of the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The reasoning of this court concerning this part of the basic facts is that of the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. 1) In the case of a lease of land, the object of which is the ownership of a building in the relevant legal principles, even in the case where the right to demand the purchase of land is extinguished by the lessor’s notification of termination in the case of a lease without a fixed period of time, the right to demand the purchase of land by the lessee is acknowledged regardless of the lessee’s right to demand the purchase of the building, and in the case of a lease of land for the purpose of ownership of a building, the right to demand the purchase of the building is legitimate in the case of a lease of land without exercising the lessee’s right to demand the purchase of the building despite the lessee’s exercise of the right to demand the purchase of the building upon the termination of the lease. However, in the case of a lease of land for the purpose of ownership of the building, the judgment against the lessor against the lessee in the lawsuit for delivery of the land and removal of the building, unless the removal of the building is executed by the final judgment, the lessee of the land may exercise the right to demand the purchase and sale of the building against the lessor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da2192).

It is clear that the duplicate of the complaint of this case containing the expression of intent to request purchase was delivered to the defendant on June 29, 2016.

Therefore, the sales contract was concluded on June 29, 2016 on the instant building 1 and 2, on which a copy of the said complaint was served, except in extenuating circumstances between the said Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant.

The defendant shall raise an objection.

arrow