logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.03 2020가단5125125
건물인도
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The defendant shall make an intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff a drawing of the attached Form 1 among the real estate listed in the attached Table 1.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings in each statement of evidence Nos. 1 and 12 (including additional numbers) of the basic facts, it can be acknowledged that the causes of the claim and the changed causes of the claim and the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor acquired the ownership of each real estate listed in the Schedule Nos. 1 and 2 attached to the list Nos. 1 and 2 owned by the Plaintiff, and no counter-proof exists.

2. Determination

A. In accordance with the facts of recognition as to the claim of the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor, the defendant is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor who acquired real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 from the plaintiff without the plaintiff's consent, among the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1, 11, 12, 13, and 11, the part (B) above ground level 186.08 square meters, which connected each point of the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1, which was used before the plaintiff's use without the plaintiff's consent, and further, while the lease contract on real estate listed in the separate sheet 1, which was used before the plaintiff's use with the plaintiff's consent, is terminated, it is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor, who acquired the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1, as such, the part (f) part (30, 31, 32, 34, 35, and 30 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1

B. As above, since the ownership of real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 as above was transferred to the plaintiff's successor, the plaintiff's claim for delivery of the above part against the defendant based on the above ownership is without merit.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim by the succeeding intervenor is justified, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow