소유권말소등기
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On January 21, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant C, setting the sales price of KRW 250,000,000 with respect to the Plaintiff’s Crossing-gun G Dae-gun, 361.2 square meters and its ground [18 square meters and 767 square meters of 195 square meters of 195 square meters of lusium housing and Class II neighborhood living facilities owned by the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of Defendant C on the grounds of sale on February 6, 2017.
B. As to the instant real estate, Defendant C had completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 22, 2019 on the ground of sale and purchase on March 22, 2019, and Defendant D concluded a mortgage establishment agreement with Defendant E Association and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 22, 2019 with the maximum debt amount of KRW 132,00,000 with the Defendant E Association as the mortgagee.
C. Meanwhile, Defendant C asserted that the area of singing practice room out of the instant real estate had been reduced differently from the time of the contract due to a change in the structure of illegal structure (at least five to three cases) and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for compensation for damages (at the Chuncheon District Court 2019Gadan51774), while Defendant C asserted that the number of singing practice room out of the instant real estate was reduced from five to three.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff by asserting that Defendant C sustained damages due to the instant sales contract. As such, the Plaintiff notified Defendant C of the cancellation of the instant sales contract as a duplicate of the complaint, and sought cancellation of each transfer of ownership against Defendant C and Defendant D due to restitution to its original state, and sought acceptance of the registration cancellation of the transfer of ownership in Defendant D’s name against the Defendant E Association, which is a mortgagee.
Dop. Dop.