beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.05.27 2019나71059

공유물분할

Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff and Plaintiff for Review)’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, and Plaintiff for reexamination).

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following cases. As such, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

"Each 1/2" in Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance shall be changed to "each 1/2 share".

B. The third-party 5 to 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance was followed as follows.

“B. The Plaintiff, as the grandchildren of D, donated 1/2 of the instant land from D on March 4, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 3, 2013.”

C. The third-party 13 to 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance was followed as follows.

D. On October 21, 2016, the above court rejected the Defendant’s assertion, and on the premise that the pertinent land is jointly owned, the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s counterclaim by allocating at the rate of 1/2 each of the Plaintiff and the Defendant an amount remaining after deducting auction costs from the proceeds of auction, such as the Plaintiff’s preliminary principal claim, on the premise that the pertinent land is jointly owned (hereinafter “the subject judgment on

(1) The judgment of the court below was rendered. The defendant appealed as Suwon District Court Decision 2016Na73108 (principal lawsuit), 2016Na7315 (Counterclaim). However, on June 21, 2017, the defendant dismissed the appeal against the defendant's principal claim, and the court rendered a judgment dismissing all the main claim for exchange and all the ancillary claims added by the above court. The defendant again appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2017Da24437 (principal lawsuit), 2017Da24344 (Counterclaim), but the judgment of the court below was pronounced on September 21, 2017, and the judgment of the court below and the above appellate court became final and conclusive around that time."

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.