beta
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.06.14 2017가단995

소유권이전등기말소청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is the plaintiff's children.

B. On March 21, 2016, with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff on March 21, 2016, the registration of ownership transfer was completed pursuant to Article 6756 of the receipt of the budget registry office of the Daejeon District Court on March 17, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as "the registration of transfer of ownership of this case"). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 3-1 to 5, and evidence 4-1 to 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff did not have donated the real estate of this case to the defendant.

Nevertheless, the defendant, who had obtained a certificate of personal seal impression from the plaintiff and used it, prepared a gift contract concerning the real estate of this case.

Therefore, the transfer registration of ownership in this case, which was completed accordingly, should be cancelled because it is invalid as a cause.

B. In the event that the registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to the judgment real estate, not only the third party but also the former owner is presumed to have acquired ownership based on legitimate grounds for registration. Therefore, the grounds for invalidation should be asserted in the grounds for appeal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, 75051, Jan. 10, 2013). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, in light of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 2 and evidence Nos. 4, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the instant registration of ownership transfer was completed without legitimate grounds for registration, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.