소유권이전등록
1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the first instance judgment shall be revoked.
2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.
3...
1. At the first instance trial, the Plaintiff sought implementation of the transfer of ownership registration procedure, which was based on the gift on November 16, 2015, on the ground of the termination of title trust, around November 16, 2015, with respect to the instant motor vehicle. The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff’s primary claim and accepted the conjunctive claim.
However, the primary claim of this case and the conjunctive claim of this case are not contradictory in their nature, and they are selectively related to each other. If both claims of this nature are brought in the form of a consolidation of primary claims, they are so-called a lawsuit for the consolidation of conjunctive claims, which is requested to limit the order and scope of the trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da17145, Sept. 4, 2002; 2012Da35675, Dec. 24, 2014). In substance, the parties requested two claims in the relation of selective consolidation with the order of primary priority, and the first instance court dismissed the primary claim, and only the defendant files an appeal by declaring that only the conjunctive claim is accepted, the appellate court shall determine as the subject of both claims as the subject of the trial.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da96868 Decided May 29, 2014). 2. Recognition
A. Nonparty D, who is the remaining birth of the Plaintiff running the Defendant Inspection, purchased the building and its site (1,190 square meters for religious land) from F, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in its name on January 14, 1999, for the purpose of conducting the inspection with the advice of Nonparty D, who was the remaining birth of the Plaintiff running the business, gathering the ministry, gathering the fire fighting fire, and gathering the family members’ clothes, with the intention of operating the inspection after obtaining advice from Nonparty F that it would be well in the business (C). On the other hand, Nonparty D purchased the building and its site (1,190 square meters for religious land) on May 19, 2005 to be used as the access road of the said inspection (hereinafter the above building and site of the inspection, and road).