소유권이전등기
1. Disposition of the court of first instance No. 1-B
Of the part of paragraph (1), with respect to Defendant B, KRW 20,097,204 and this is applicable to the Plaintiff.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a dismissal as set forth in the following paragraph (2).
2. At the bottom of 5 pages of the height, “The head of a Dong shall consult and coordinate the transfer of registration at the bottom of the five pages” shall be considered as “the farmers shall consult and coordinate after the transfer of registration.”
The following shall be added between five parallels at the bottom of the nine pages and six parallels:
As seen earlier, the Defendant Company asserts that the Defendant Company offsets the amount of KRW 49,443,637 against the Defendant Company’s retirement allowance claims against the Defendant Company on an automatic claim for the settlement of KRW 49,43,637 against the Deceased. As seen earlier, at the bottom of the re-contract in this case, the Defendant Company stated that “49,443,637, the remainder of the advance payment, shall be adjusted after the transfer of F and Farming registration.” Accordingly, the Defendant Company’s claim for the settlement of accounts against the Defendant Company shall be deemed that the due date arrives after the Defendant Company completed the registration of ownership transfer of each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant Company performed the above registration of ownership transfer until the closing date of the argument in the first instance trial. Accordingly, the set-off defense of the Defendant Company is without merit.
A person shall be appointed.
B. According to the evidence No. 34, the account of this case can be acknowledged as the account for which the retirement pension of the deceased and the employees N of the Defendant Company was accumulated at the time of November 30, 2014, and the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as comprehensively taking into account the descriptions of evidence No. 15, 29, 30, and No. 4, 15, and 33, as well as the overall purport of the pleadings at the first instance trial witness L and M, namely, the previous operating fund account of the Defendant Company (the National Bank OO account and the same bank P account) after the date of acquisition of the business contract of this case.