logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.08.17 2018가단20996
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 29, 2009, the Defendant and B newly constructed each building indicated in the separate sheet of real estate (hereinafter “each building of this case”) and completed registration of initial ownership on February 14, 201 as co-owners who jointly own 1/2 shares in each building of this case.

B. On October 26, 2010, the Defendant and B leased the building indicated in paragraph (3) of the indication of the attached real estate (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Plaintiff by setting the lease deposit amounting to KRW 650 million and the lease term from January 30, 201 to January 30, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). C.

After the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff has been engaged in financial business in the instant building, and on January 11, 2018, the number of its members is about 5,350.

On April 11, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased 1/2 shares of each of the instant buildings from B, and completed the registration of transfer of shares in the name of the Plaintiff on April 16, 2014.

E. The Defendant asserted against the Plaintiff that: (a) the Cheongju District Court Decision 2016Da102689; and (b) the Plaintiff occupied the instant building exclusively without consultation with the Defendant, a co-owner of the 1/2 equity share in the instant building, and subsequently used and profit from the instant building even after the lease term expires on January 31, 2016; (c) thus, the Defendant sought exclusion from exclusive use as an act of preserving the jointly-owned property; (d) filed a lawsuit for requesting the delivery of the instant building on the basis of the receipt and reimbursement of the lease deposit KRW 325 million; and (e) was sentenced on July 20, 2016, that “the Plaintiff received KRW 325 million from the Defendant, and at the same time, delivered the instant building to the Defendant” (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

F. The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant judgment, appealed to the Cheongju District Court 2016Na12770, but was sentenced to the dismissal of an appeal on September 8, 2017, and thereafter appealed to the Supreme Court 2017Da266481, but the Plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court on November 29, 2017.

arrow