(영문) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.04.28 2015가단35545

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) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.04.28 2015가단35545

건물명도

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

A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer as of July 16, 2015, the main district court of Chuncheon as to the building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. The Defendant is operating “C” while occupying the instant building.

C. The Plaintiff did not conclude any contract with the Defendant, including the right to occupy the instant building, including a lease agreement, and did not succeed to the status of the lessor of the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives (hereinafter “NFC”) as the former owner of the instant building.

Therefore, even though the defendant does not have any authority to occupy the building of this case, he occupies the building of this case without permission.

E. Accordingly, from July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff sought payment of unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,500,000 per month from the delivery of the instant building and the date when the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the instant building to the date when delivery of the instant building is completed or the Plaintiff loses ownership.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the claim for delivery of the instant building 1) The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant building on July 16, 2015 by the main district court of Chuncheon as the main district court’s decision-making on July 16, 2015, and the Defendant’s possession of the instant building and management of “C” can be acknowledged by taking into account either dispute between the parties or the overall purport of pleading as to the statement in the evidence No. 1. 1. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant succeeded to the lease contract concluded between NFFC and the Defendant when the Plaintiff purchased the instant building, and thus, the Defendant has the right to occupy the instant building as a lessee.

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2016.05.13 2014가단7666

-춘천지방법원 2016.05.20 2015나4430

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2019.12.18 2019가단54896

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2014.01.21 2013가단4035

-서울고등법원 2020.11.12 2020나2020843