logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원해남지원 2017.10.24 2017가단20026
토지인도
Text

1. The Defendant points out to the Plaintiff each of the table Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 of the annexed drawings among the six parts of the 6th forest land in Jeonnam-do.

Reasons

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant lawsuit is unlawful by filing a lawsuit without being duly entrusted by the Plaintiff’s legal representative. However, according to the litigation delegation letter, the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression, etc. submitted by the Plaintiff’s legal representative, the Plaintiff’s legal representative recognized the fact that the lawsuit was entrusted by the Plaintiff, and no other evidence exists to deem that the said delegation of lawsuit is unlawful.

The defendant's main defense is without merit.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 15, 1970, on June 15, 1970, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in D, the father of the Plaintiff.

D A. On November 20, 1992, the Plaintiff, E, and F (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”) who died on November 20, 1992, and co-ownership of the forest of this case by inheritance of the Plaintiff, E, and F (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”).

B. The Defendant installed a concrete structure (hereinafter “instant structure”) on a ship (a) part of 38 square meters in sequence of the indication of the attached drawing among the instant forest land, which connects each point of 1,2,3,4,5,6,00 square meters (hereinafter “instant main part”) among the forest land in this case, and owned and used it.

[Ground of Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 9 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

3. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant has a duty to remove the structure of this case and deliver the key part of this case to the plaintiff, who is a co-owner, except in extenuating circumstances.

4. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant's assertion of the acquisition by prescription of possession 1 is about April 1987 that part of the G forest in Ydo-gun, Jeonnam-do, adjacent to the forest of this case, remaining dry field.

arrow