logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.10.26 2014가단49510
매매대금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s husband C sold approximately 10 square meters (10 square meters of buildings, etc. registration number E; hereinafter the instant unauthorized buildings) of the building without permission for Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D ground to G operating the real estate brokerage office under the trade name, “F real estate” purchased from the owner.

B. Upon receiving a recommendation from G to the effect that the right to move into a apartment site according to the housing site development project can be granted if the Plaintiff purchased the instant unauthorized building from G, and around May 14, 2003, the Plaintiff purchased the building at KRW 95,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and on the same day, remitted the down payment of KRW 45,00,000 to H.

On May 21, 2003, the Plaintiff was issued at the request of I, and the title holder of the instant unauthorized building was changed from the Defendant to the Plaintiff. On April 8, 1982, the Plaintiff received delivery of the confirmation source for the instant unauthorized building, and paid KRW 50,000,000, which stated that the instant unauthorized building was constructed before April 8, 1982, and thereafter received a receipt from G, which received KRW 95,000,000 from G on May 22, 2003.

C. Around December 2004, the housing site development project (hereinafter the project in this case) was implemented because the daily cost of the area J where the instant unauthorized building is located was designated and announced as the housing site development zone. However, on January 31, 2007, the head of Mapo-gu deleted the registration of the ledger of the unauthorized building management for the reason that the instant unauthorized building did not meet the registration requirements on the ledger of the unauthorized Building Management, and the Plaintiff did not receive the occupancy right or compensation for the instant unauthorized building.

Although the pertinent unauthorized building did not meet the registration requirements, it could have been registered on the ledger of unauthorized Building management. C is an unauthorized building that was not registered on the ledger of Unauthorized Building management from the residents of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from around 2003 to 2004.

arrow