(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2015.12.22 2015가단8513

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) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2015.12.22 2015가단8513

건물인도

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff’s building indicated in the attached list of the Plaintiff’s assertion (hereinafter “instant building”) is an unregistered building that is originally owned by C. Since the Plaintiff was donated by C and owned by the Plaintiff, the Defendant, who occupied the said building, is obligated to deliver the said building to the Plaintiff.

B. Determination 1) Even if a transferee of an unregistered building without permission fails to obtain the registration of ownership transfer, it cannot be deemed that the purchaser of such building has a customary real right equivalent to ownership (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da53006, Jun. 14, 1996). According to the record No. 1-1, the Plaintiff can be recognized as having donated the building without permission from C, the owner of the building of this case, who is not the owner of the building of this case. However, under the above legal principles, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as the owner of the building of this case or the owner of a customary real right corresponding to ownership. Thus, the request for delivery based on the ownership of the building of this case is without merit. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s claim is determined as follows: C, the owner of the building of this case, is deemed to have been included in subrogation of claims for delivery based on ownership against the Defendant.

According to the above facts, the building of this case is owned by C, and the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to C, who is the owner, and the plaintiff has the right to seek delivery of the building of this case pursuant to the above donation contract. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff who subrogated for C for preserving the right to claim delivery of the building of this case to C.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.

A. The summary of the defense was that the plaintiff sold the building of this case to the defendant.

참조판례

-대법원 1996. 6. 14. 선고 94다53006 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.22 2014나40847

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.03 2016가단5153628

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.29 2017나21236

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2017.01.12 2015가단4359

-대법원 2007. 6. 15. 선고 2007다11347 판결