소유권말소등기
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff without dispute had five children, such as E, F, G, H, I, under the chain.
The Plaintiff’s G married with Defendant D, and two children, including Defendant B and C, were married, and the Defendants died on January 31, 2015, resulting in the Defendants’ inheritance.
Attached Form
The plaintiff owned each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 through 3 list. Of them, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of G as the reason of donation was received on June 3, 2003 from the Changwon District Court, Msan Branch, No. 35991, Jun. 3, 2003, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant B, which was based on the gift on June 12, 2003, No. 38361, Jun. 12, 2003, and No. 38361, May 30, 2003, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant C, which was based on the gift on May 30, 2003, as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet 3 list, was completed on June 3, 2003, respectively.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. around 2003, the Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, entered into an agreement with G and Defendant B and C to donate each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 3 on the condition of the Plaintiff’s support and the conduct of good aid. Each registration of ownership transfer was completed, and G et al. did not perform the burden, such as suspending the Plaintiff’s support on the only day of the month while living with the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff donated each of the above land. Thus, the Plaintiff cancelled the above-paid donation agreement and sought restitution.
B. It is insufficient to recognize that the gift contract has been concluded on the condition of the burden as alleged by the Plaintiff, G and the Defendants solely on the basis of the entries in the certificate Nos. 4, 7, and 8 and the testimony of the witness E with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 through 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.
Therefore, it is necessary to further examine whether the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was performed.