logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.03.26 2018가단1510
토지인도등
Text

1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiff as indicated in the attached Form 1, 2, 8, 7, and 1 among the land size of 198.5 square meters in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

(a) Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M&T 198.5 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The Defendants divided the aggregate buildings of the first floor or the seventh floor constructed on the ground level 181.6 square meters adjacent to the instant land and divided ownership of the said land according to their respective shares.

(A) The right to the site of ownership is owned by the defendants in proportion to the shares of 15.263/181 or 14.754/181.6/181.

Meanwhile, a fence was installed for the boundary of the above aggregate building owned by the Defendants and the site and the instant land. Of the instant land owned by the Plaintiff, the fence of the Defendants was installed by breaking up the part (A) and 3.2 square meters in a ship (hereinafter “instant fence”) connected each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 8, 7, and 1 among the instant land owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant J: Evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number, if any), the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by appraiserO, and the remainder of the purport of the entire pleadings: Confession (the main text of Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants owned the above aggregate building and site and occupied the part of the land possessed by the wall of this case without authority and interfered with the plaintiff's ownership. Thus, the defendants jointly have a duty to remove the wall of this case on the ground of the above land and deliver the above land to the plaintiff.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow