logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.11.28 2017가단7266
공작물철거
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. Attached Form 1 shall be indicated on the land of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C large 90 square meters.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 12, 1996, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as Seoul Southern District Court’s receipt No. 37684 on July 8, 2015 due to inheritance due to consultation and division on January 12, 1996.

B. E owned the instant land: (a) on December 21, 1981, he sold it to F and completed the registration of ownership transfer to F, which was the representative of the Defendant’s side; (b) on April 26, 1996, he donated neighboring land to G; (c) on April 23, 1984, the Defendant was the owner of the church building, which newly constructed a three-story church on the neighboring land owned by F and completed the registration of ownership preservation.

C. In using a neighboring land church building, the Defendant installed concrete structures, air-conditioning room, water-conditioning room, water meter, steel gate on the ground of 0.45 square meters in the line connected with each of the above points in sequence, or on the ground of 0.45 square meters in the line connected with each of the above points, the Defendant installed each concrete structure, air-conditioning room, water-conditioning room, water meter meter, steel gate on the ground of 1.4 square meters in the line connected each of the above points, and installed each of the above ground of 1.4 square meters in the attached Form 1, and laid down the sewerage pipe and sewage hole.

As the Defendant used the instant land as a church parking lot, etc. around June 21, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the removal of the steel gate on the premise that he/she is the owner of the instant land, and issued a written notification to the Defendant that he/she would install a gate according to the boundary surveying and the result thereof if he/she refuses to comply therewith.

E. On July 19, 2016, the Plaintiff visited the Defendant church to enter the steel gate on the ground of the survey, with the permission of the manager of the Defendant’s side, and installed a pents immediately after completing the survey. The Plaintiff received the Defendant’s demand to go on the part of the Defendant in the course of installing the pents without the Defendant’s permission.

arrow