beta
Text
1. Defendant C, in sequence, has each point indicated in the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 on the ground of 400 m3 m3,00 m3,000 m3,000 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B
A. Defendant B, who claimed the Plaintiff, constructed the instant building Nos. 1 and 2 with the building permission granted by E through the lease or loan for use of the instant land, until now, occupied the instant land when owning the instant building Nos. 1 and 2 on the instant land. Since the Plaintiff acquired the ownership by donation from E, the said Defendant is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiff, who is the exercise of the right to claim the exclusion of interference based on ownership, and deliver the instant land, and pay KRW 10 million out of the unjust enrichment equivalent to the land rent from August 28, 2013, which the Plaintiff acquired the ownership to the present time.
B. It is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B owned the building Nos. 1 and 2, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and possessed the land of this case, solely with the descriptions or images of the evidence Nos. 1 and 5 (including the paper numbers). Since there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the Plaintiff’s above assertion cannot be recognized.
2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C
A. 1) The Plaintiff received the instant land from E on August 12, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 28, 2013 for this reason. 2) Defendant C constructed the instant land Nos. 1 and 2 with a building permit granted from E through the lease or loan for use of the instant land, and thereafter owned the instant land. The Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant land by Eroman. The Plaintiff sought the removal of the instant land Nos. 1 and 2 and delivery of the instant land by exercising the right of claim for exclusion of interference based on the ownership.
[Grounds for Recognition: Confession (Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act)
B. According to the above facts of recognition 1, Defendant C does not have the right to possess the land of this case.