logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.07.11 2017가합6060
통행방해금지청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

Facts of recognition

Defendant B’s position as the parties is the owner of a house located in Gyeonggi-gu Gyeonggi-do D (hereinafter “instant house”) and the husband of F, who is the husband, is the owner of land D in Gyeonggi-gu D (number address: 1 large 896m2, Gyeonggi-gun I large 896m2, hereinafter “instant housing site”);

In this case, the defendant C, who is a Siberter, is residing in the housing of this case.

The plaintiff is using the current status of this case as the company for bicycle manufacturing business in order to keep bicycle parts in the warehouse located on the side of the current status of this case (the representative director of the plaintiff).

As of the present road in the present condition of the present site of this case, approximately eight square meters is included in the present road of this case, and F is an owner of approximately eight square meters among the present roads of this case, and the remainder of the present road is the owner of the instant G and H.

In the middle of the present situation road of this case, the housing of this case is located immediately next to the present situation road of this case.

The Defendants installed signboards and posts for the protection of the Mandole, which are written “ Mandole, Mandole,” as shown in attached Form 2, in the vicinity of Mandole.

Based on the housing of this case, the width of the current road of this case is 290 cm and 330 cm up to the place where the pool is unfilled.

The width of the end part of the present status of this case is about 260 cm.

On June 28, 2016, Defendant C was convicted of a fine of KRW 3 million (No. 2016Dadan358) due to an offense that interferes with general traffic, and all appeals (No. 2016No. 4433) and appeals (No. 2017Do480) against the said judgment were dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

Defendant C is the representative director of the Plaintiff on April 25, 2018.

arrow