소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. 제1심 판결의 인용 이 법원이 이 사건에 관하여 설시할 이유는, 제1심 판결 제5면 제9행의 ‘피고 C의 조부(祖父)’를 ‘피고 C의 증조부(曾祖父)’로, 제5면 제11행의 ‘O의 후손들로 구성된 Q파’를 ‘O의 후손들로 구성된 R파’로, 제6면 제15행부터 제18행까지의 ‘1629년경에 작성된 D씨 세보의 서문에는 I의 자손이 대구, 순흥을 비롯하여 칠곡, 충주, 전주 5곳에 흩어져 살고 있고, I의 분묘는 없어졌으나 그의 부인 AM의 분묘는 순흥에 있고 그 땅의 거리가 300여리에 이른다고 기재되어 있다.’ 부분을 'I의 자손이 대구, 순흥을 비롯하여 칠곡, 충주, 전주 5곳에 흩어져 살고 있고, I의 분묘는 없어졌으나 그의 부인 AM의 분묘는 순흥에 있다.
“Each height is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance, except as added to Chapter 6, Chapter 18, as follows. Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
【Supplementary portion】 The plaintiff clan did not raise any objection for more than 16 years from December 7, 1993 and from March 3, 1995, for which the registration of ownership transfer was completed under the name of the defendant clan with respect to each of the real estate of this case. In particular, on December 6, 2010, the plaintiff clan recognized that each of the real estate of this case was owned by the defendant clan on December 6, 2010, which was published on August 1985, the plaintiff clan as the member of the plaintiff clan, AO, AP, and C, which was published on December 6, 2010, which was the transfer of the lawsuit of this case.) The remaining 17 parcels, excluding six parcels of each of the real estate of this case, are written as the above answers of AM, and the above answers of the plaintiff clan are separately written.
2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and all of the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.