(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.02.18 2015가단16924

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.02.18 2015가단16924

토지공유물분할

Text

1. Attached Form among the Daejeon-gu Daejeon 453.6m2;

1.board (2) connecting each point of 9, 2, 3, 4, and 9 of drawings in sequence.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The ownership relationship of the instant land is 1) Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon Daejeon 453.6 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

(1) On October 195, 195, the Plaintiff was originally owned by H, and the land co-ownership relationship of this case was as listed below before the Plaintiff purchases some of the instant land from I and J. 1. International Sale 35/342 of the gift 35/342 of the title on October 16, 1995 to the Plaintiff on October 16, 1995, and sale 212/2052 of the inheritance 212/20524 (dong) and (dong) 212/20525, Defendant C (dong) 212/20526 Defendant D (dong) 212/20526, Defendant E (dong) 212/20527, Defendant E 212/20528, Defendant 205, J. 251, 205, and the Plaintiff completed the entire share transfer registration from Defendant C (dong) 205/205.

3) At present, the instant land is jointly owned by the Plaintiff at a rate of 92/2052 shares (i.e., 95/342/342/342/2052); and the Defendants respectively at a rate of 212/2052 shares. (b) The current status of the use of the instant land is not currently used for specific purposes, but is left unattended.

2) The Plaintiff is running a telecom in Daejeon-gu Daejeon, Daejeon (Attached) adjacent to the instant land (attached Form).

2. Reference to the guidance.

The Plaintiff, who failed to reach a partition of co-owned property consultation, out of the land in this case

1. The portion of (b) section 219.3 square meters connected in order to each point of (b) section 9, 2, 3, 4, and 9 of drawings (hereinafter “the part of (b) of this case”) is owned by the Plaintiff, and the part of (a) part 234.3 square meters connected in order to each point of (b) section 1, 9, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 1 of the same drawings (hereinafter “the part of (a) of this case”) was divided as owned by the Defendants, and the Defendants tried to consult on partition of co-owned property with the Defendants to use that part of (b) above as a mother parking lot.

However, the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not agree on partition of co-owned property.

As of December 24, 2015, the market price appraisal of the instant land is to be sold in a lump sum and to be sold in installments.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원경주지원 2015.01.27 2014가단1167

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2018.10.16 2017가단1971

-대전지방법원 2019.05.08 2018가단221710

-부산지방법원서부지원 2020.04.09 2019가단110269

-대전지방법원 2019.12.10 2019나102909