logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.08 2013가단191037
도로이용권리 확인의 소
Text

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiffs are exclusively 1,722 square meters of forests and fields D. 11,72 square meters against the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs purchased part of G 126,248 square meters of G 126,248 square meters (hereinafter “Y” due to the change of the name of the administrative district after this, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership or the registration of transfer of ownership as shown in attached Table 2.

B. F completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 14, 2004, due to the partition of co-owned property on June 10, 2004, with respect to shares of 560/11,892 shares, which are part of the above forest, on October 19, 2005, the registration of provisional disposition was completed on October 21, 2005 by the Suwon District Court. Defendant A acquired the ownership of the above forest through a compulsory sale by official auction on July 5, 2007, but completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 10, 208, with respect to shares of 11,32/1,892 among the above real estate on October 10, 207, and on October 10, 2008, Defendant B and C acquired shares of 11,32/1,892, and on October 10, 2008, Defendant C and C acquired shares of the above real estate on July 19, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 8 through 10 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the ground of the primary claim by the plaintiffs

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' claim for the first main claim is the land partitioned to be used as access roads or passage roads of the land as listed in the separate sheet No. 2 purchased by the plaintiffs. The defendants also acquired the shares of the road of this case while knowing such circumstances. Therefore, the defendants are obligated to accept the plaintiffs to use the entire forest of this case as roads in accordance with the good faith principle.

B. The Plaintiff 1, J, and K’s assertion was examined, and the Plaintiff’s own jurisdiction does not adjoin the instant forest and field L, M, N, andO in a warden, but is in contact with the instant forest and field 3,386 square meters, and the said P forest and field 3,386 square meters.

arrow