logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.06.11 2014가합12495
토지인도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On September 4, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) was awarded the instant land at a voluntary auction procedure for Suwon District Court members of Pyeongtaek Housing Site C; and (b) completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on September 11, 2014; and (c) the fact that the Defendant currently occupies the instant land is no dispute between the parties.

As above, the defendant, the possessor of the land of this case, is obligated to deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff, the owner, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's right of retention defense

A. In a case where a contractor who was awarded a contract for a new construction of a building with the relevant legal doctrine was suspended in the course of construction of a building on the land, the said fixtures are merely corresponding to the land and cannot exercise a lien on such fixtures (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 2007Ma98, May 30, 2008). Meanwhile, in order to be deemed an independent building as a building, a minimum pole, roof, and main wall are installed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da51872, Jan. 16, 2001). The installed structures are located on the underground floor.

There is no reason to view otherwise.

In addition, a lien acquired with respect to a building shall have its effect on the part of the site within the extent necessary for the maintenance and use of the building in question (see Supreme Court Decision 79Da1170 delivered on October 14, 1980).

Facts of recognition

The EL Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “EL Korea”) ordered the construction of a new construction of a primary complex building on the instant land by the first and nine primary floors above the ground, and the same construction of a new construction company (hereinafter “same development construction”) through a new public corporation (hereinafter “new public corporation”) has subcontracted the construction of the instant building. The Defendant is about the part of the construction of a new construction of a new building from the same development construction around February 6, 2012.

arrow