부담부증여계약해지에따른소유권이전등기
Registration of transfer of ownership following the termination of a contract of onerous donation 2008 Doz.23647
1. Al (27 years old, female);
2. A2 (Attending 49 Years, South Korea)
3. A3 (46 Yearss and Females)
4. A4 (Attending 55 Years, Women)
5. A5 (Life and Female in 70)
6. A6 (Age 75 and Female)
[Judgment of the court below]
1. B1 (75 Yearss, Residuals)
2. B2 (Examine 78, South Korea)
[Judgment of the court below]
June 10, 2009
July 8, 2009
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed. 2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
The Defendants, among the shares 1453/2906 shares of 1453/2906 shares in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, for each of 14/63, 12, and A3 on the grounds of the termination of the non-paid donation contract on the date of the pronouncement of the judgment of this case, shall implement each of the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer to Plaintiffs A1, A1 for each of 14/63, 63, 65, and 63 shares in each of 4/63 shares.
1. Basic facts
The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2-1, and 4-1.
A. Plaintiff A1 is the wife of the deceased C1 (Death on February 20, 205), Plaintiff A2 is the wife of the deceased C1 (Death on February 2005), Plaintiff A2 is the husband of the deceased C1, Plaintiff A3 is the woman of the deceased C1, and the deceased C2 (Death on March 17, 1990) are the husband of the network C1. Plaintiff A4 is the wife of the network C2, Plaintiff A5, and Plaintiff A6 are the grandchildren of each network C1 as the husband of the network C2. Defendant B1 is the husband of Plaintiff A2, and Defendant B2 is the grandchildren of Plaintiff A2, respectively.
B. On September 24, 2001, the net C1: (a) donated the Defendants with a notice of the 2,906m square meters (hereinafter “instant gift”) of the land of this case on September 24, 2001; (b) on September 26, 2001, with respect to each of the instant shares of 1453/2906 shares among the instant land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of Defendant B1 and Defendant B2 under the name of Defendant B15375 as the receipt of the registry office of the Busan District Court’s Gangseo-gu Branch of Busan District Court by Defendant B15375 as Defendant B1 and 15376 as Defendant B2.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Summary of the parties' assertion
1) Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion
The Plaintiffs asserted that, around June 11, 1982, the deceased C2 lost Nonparty C3 and C4, who were children, and died due to traffic accidents around March 17, 1990, the deceased C1 sent Defendant B1, who was the following of Plaintiff A2, to the deceased C2 for the deceased C2, Defendant B1 was two-way funeral expenses of the deceased C2, and that, around September 11, 2001, the deceased C2 did not perform the above-mentioned obligation of transfer registration on the deceased C2, the Defendants donated the land to the Defendants on the condition that the deceased C3 and C4, who did not perform the above obligation of transfer registration on the deceased C2 x 32 /63 of the inheritance (=the Defendants were entitled to transfer registration on the deceased C2’s inheritance)/63 of the deceased C2, the deceased C1’s heir/63 of the deceased C2, and thus, the Defendants did not perform the above obligation of transfer registration on the deceased C2’s inheritance (=363/64 of the inheritance)/63)/63)/63 of the Defendants
2) Summary of the Defendants’ assertion
The Defendants asserted that: (a) as the Plaintiff A2 dumpeds the property while living in a dump; (b) the deceased C1 would have a concern that the dump will make it difficult for the grandchildren to live; and (c) the Defendants’ hump Nonparty C5, a punishment of the Defendants, claimed that the instant land was donated to the Defendants on the condition that the deceased C1 and his family were residing in Gangseo-gu Busan, Gangseo-gu, where the deceased C2 were donated the instant land to the Defendants, and that the Defendants did not receive a donation of the deceased C2, a small Ibsc
B. Determination
In light of the above facts, the court below's finding that the defendant B1 was not a witness of the deceased party and the defendant B1 was not a witness of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of No. 5 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of No. 1, No. 6-1, No. 7, No. 1, No. 8-1, and No. 5 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of No. 1, No. 1, No. 5 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party, No. 1, No. 5 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party, No. 1, No. 5 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 6 of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of the deceased party of this case. 1.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.
Chief Judge Park Tae-tae
Judge Lee Dong-dong
Judges Kang Jeong-hee