(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.09.16 2014나10452

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) 창원지방법원 2015.09.16 2014나10452

건물철거 및 대지인도

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Upon receiving the claim added at the trial, the defendant shall pay 456,000 won to the plaintiff and this.

Reasons

1. Basic facts and

2. Grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the judgment on removal of a building and request for the delivery of a site are as follows.

1. Basic facts and

2. Since each part of the judgment is identical to each other, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. The facts that the Defendant occupied and used the part of the instant crime out of the Plaintiff’s land are as seen earlier. Accordingly, the Defendant obtained the benefits of use of the instant land without any legal ground and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to the possession and use of the instant land.

Furthermore, according to the result of the appraisal commission with respect to the Japanese appraisal corporation of the court of the first instance as to the amount of unjust enrichment, the rent for the part of the crime in this case is 456,000 won in total for the period from August 1, 2007 to July 14, 2015, which was after the plaintiff acquired the ownership of the plaintiff's land, and the rent is 6,300 won in July 2015, and the rent is 6,300 won in each month and thereafter is ratified.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 456,00 won with the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from July 29, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of the copy of the claim and the ground for the alteration of the claim of this case, and the amount calculated by the rate of 6,300 won per month from July 15, 2015 to the day of the completion of delivery of the affected part of this case.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff's request for removal of the building of this case and the request for the delivery of the site are dismissed as it is without merit, and the plaintiff's request for return of unjust enrichment added at the trial shall be accepted for the reasons. Since the judgment of the first instance which dismissed the plaintiff's request for removal of the building of this case and the request for delivery of the site is justified, the plaintiff

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2020.01.16 2018가단10470

-대구지방법원경주지원 2016.11.03 2015가단987

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.09.26 2016가단9391

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2018.02.20 2016가단7369

-청주지방법원 2018.10.11 2017가단101089