logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.04.17 2013가합11284
부당이득반환 등
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) was owned by C. On February 9, 2002, D had the ownership transfer registration been completed on the ground of voluntary auction, and on October 14, 2002, the ownership transfer registration was completed for the Plaintiff on October 14, 2002.

(Attachment 1) The registration of ownership transfer was made to the Plaintiff only with respect to the portion of 5,394/8,034 with respect to the real estate stated in attached Table 1.

The Defendant is an owner of the building area of 76 square meters in Namyang-si and the above ground area of 766 square meters in Namyang-si, F large 638 square meters, G large 569 square meters, and for entry into the said building area and housing, the Defendant passes through the roads installed on the part of the instant land (hereinafter referred to as the “instant passage”) connecting each of the points of the following, among each of the instant land, with the indication of drawings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 1 of the instant land, and uses the excellent pipes laid underground as the instant passage.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul Nos. 11 through 18 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is not allowed to pass through the road in this case since the plaintiff has been hindered in exercising the ownership of the road in this case as the defendant occupied and used the road in this case without permission and used the excellent pipes laid underground. The plaintiff is obligated to remove the road constructed on the road in this case and the excellent pipes laid underground, and return the rent equivalent to the rent in unjust enrichment.

In regard to this, the Defendant renounced the exclusive and exclusive right to use the instant road by C, which is the owner of each of the instant land, and acquired the ownership of the Plaintiff, who specifically succeeded to the said road, with knowledge of such circumstances, to the effect that the said use and profit is restricted.

arrow