logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.12.14 2016가합50276
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B received KRW 484,016,140 from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, [Attachment 1] No. 1.

Reasons

1. Facts of premise;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association that completed the registration of establishment on September 21, 2015, with the approval for establishment from the Changwon-si mayor on September 21, 2015 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 13792, Jan. 19, 2016; hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) in order to implement a housing reconstruction and improvement project whose project implementation district covers 141,100 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”).

B. The Defendants are owners of each real estate listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 1 to 12 in the instant rearrangement zone.

C. On October 15, 2015, the Plaintiff sent a written peremptory notice to Defendant B, D, F, H, I, J, K, L, and M, stating that “If the Plaintiff consented to the housing reconstruction improvement project promoted by the Plaintiff within two months from the date of receipt of the written peremptory notice and if the Plaintiff does not consent to the establishment of the association, he/she shall exercise the right to demand sale under Article 39 of the Urban Improvement Act.” Defendant C, E, and G, who owns only the land within the instant rearrangement zone, can not be a member of the Plaintiff’s association regardless of whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the association.” On January 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the implementation of the ownership transfer registration procedure with the Defendants on the claim for sale of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 list.

[Ground for recognition] Defendant G: The Defendants, other than Defendant G, do not have any dispute, as long as they do not specify the following numbers: (a) the fact that there is no dispute; (b) the number of evidence Nos. 1 through 5 is included; and (c) the number is specified.

arrow