(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.05.15 2013가단59483

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) 부산지방법원 2014.05.15 2013가단59483

전봇대철거

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment are the owners of the building on the 6th floor above 27-1, 28-1, and 28-2 above ground in Busan Jung-gu. The Defendant installed one utility pole on the front road of the building in order to obstruct the Plaintiff’s access to the building or the transportation of goods through windows, and there is a high possibility that a utility pole may be abused for various accidents or criminal crimes due to a high voltage cable or various telecommunications lines installed in the utility pole. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim and judgment can seek removal of utility poles based on the right to claim removal of interference or the right to claim removal of interference pursuant to Article 214 of the Civil Act.

Article 214 of the Civil Code provides, “The owner may demand the person who disturbs ownership to remove the disturbance and may demand the person who might interfere with ownership to take preventive measures or claim compensation for damage.”

The interference is subject to the claim for the removal or prevention of disturbance only when it goes beyond the limit of acceptance in light of the social concept in the state where the right of use or profit-making of ownership is not realized or its possibility is not realized.

According to the statement Nos. 1 and 6 evidence and the result of the appraisal commission for video and the appraiser’s cadastral work, the Defendant’s telegraphr can recognize the fact that the Plaintiff-owned building differs from the shortest distance of 0.91m and has been partially used toward the outside of the building, and that the above telegraphr connects various electric wires, etc., but it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s ownership may be interfered with or hindered by exceeding the tolerance limit in light of social norms.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is groundless.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-민법 제214조

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2018.06.20 2018가단100951

-광주지방법원 2015.08.13 2014가합62895

-창원지방법원 2016.05.24 2015가단77277

-서울고등법원 2018.02.21 2016나8437

-대법원 2014. 11. 27. 선고 2014다52612 판결