logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.13 2015가단157048
건물명도 등
Text

1. The defendants deliver each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Although the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) were owned by Defendant C, the Plaintiffs and H were determined as buyers at the sale date of the sale procedure for the Liwon Branch E, F (Joint), G (Joint), and Voluntary Auction, etc. (hereinafter “instant auction”) which commenced on December 19, 201.

B. The Plaintiffs and H completed the registration of ownership transfer as to Plaintiff A25/40 shares, Plaintiff B10 shares, and H5/40 shares among the instant buildings due to the sale by voluntary auction on the same day after full payment of the sale price on November 20, 2013.

C. Until now, Defendant C sets up part of the tools of his slaughter on the instant building, and Defendant D reported the right of retention with the claim for construction cost of KRW 430 million as the secured claim at the auction court of this case on November 2, 2012. Defendant C currently claimed the right of retention and possessed the instant building.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The gist of the parties' assertion is co-owners who acquired the ownership of the building of this case through the auction of this case. Defendant C, the former owner of the building of this case, continues to hold his household tools within the building of this case, and Defendant D, despite not holding a lien on the building of this case, has a duty to claim a lien and to deliver each of the buildings of this case to the plaintiffs. Accordingly, Defendant D, as a construction business operator with the claim for the construction cost of the building of this case, has been exercising a lien by occupying the building of this case from around 2009, which was prior to the commencement of the auction procedure of this case. Thus, Defendant D asserted that it is impossible to comply with the plaintiffs' claim.

B. A person who acquired a lien subsequent to the registration of the decision on commencing auction on any real estate to be determined shall be the purchaser of the auction procedure.

arrow