토지소유권확인의 소
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of ownership transfer with his/her child C, who is the owner of B 5,938 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant land”). However, the Incheon District Court’s reinforcement registry office, etc. dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for registration on the ground that the Plaintiff, who was specified as the person responsible for registration, does not coincide with the “D” recorded as the owner in the registration record.
Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of ownership of the instant land against the Defendant for the transfer registration of the instant land.
2. The Defendant’s judgment on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit from confirmation, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.
If a claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State is unregistered and there is no registered titleholder in the land cadastre or forest land cadastre or forest land cadastre, or the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown, if the presumption of right is not recognized in the entry of the owner of land cadastre or forest land cadastre for unregistered land or forest land cadastre, or if there are special circumstances, such as denying the ownership of a third party registered by the State and continuing to claim state ownership, there is benefit in confirmation.
Therefore, if a registration is made on land, the entry of the holder of the title on the register does not coincide with the actual entry.
Even if the identity of personality is recognized, it is possible to register the change of indication of the registered titleholder, and there is no benefit to seek confirmation against the State on the actual ownership.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Da230815 Decided October 27, 2016 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da230815, Oct. 27, 2016). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments in the health room, Gap’s 1 through 4, 7 through 9, and 11 (including additional numbers) with respect to the instant land, there exists a registry as to the instant land, and the entire purport of the pleadings, the “D”, “Military E” with its owner’s domicile, and “the completion