소유권말소등기
All of the plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.
The defendant 1/6. each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. D, married to E, had F (Death around October 6, 1979) and the Plaintiffs and the Defendant as children.
D died on October 23, 2017, and E died on August 15, 2018.
B. On October 4, 1986, the deceased D (hereinafter “the deceased”) completed the registration of ownership transfer for 1,560/11,210 of the G land in Busan-gu, Busan-gu on the ground of sale and purchase on September 8, 1986, and owned the ownership transfer, but completed the registration of ownership change for the instant real estate divided from the above land due to the confirmation of partition under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Partition of Co-Owned Land on December 20, 1989.
C. On April 11, 2017, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on a donation made on April 10, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 14, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment as to the main claim
A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion was diagnosed by dementia around September 27, 201, and the symptoms have deteriorated, and around April 2017, the Plaintiff was in a state of his/her office ability not to have basic communications. However, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate based on the gift contract under the name of the Deceased, power of attorney, etc. by forging the donation contract under the name of the Deceased.
Therefore, since a donation agreement on April 10, 2017 with respect to the instant real estate is null and void, the registration of ownership transfer against the Defendant for each of the 1/3 shares, which are the Plaintiffs’ share of inheritance, among the instant real estate, based on the restoration of real name.
B. Determination 1) The “psychological capacity” refers to a mental ability or intelligence that can reasonably determine its meaning or result based on normal perception and towing ability, and whether a person has a mental capacity or not should be determined individually in relation to a specific juristic act (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da10113, Oct. 11, 2002) (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da1013, Oct. 11, 2002).