소유권이전등기 말소
1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against Defendant E shall be revoked;
Defendant E shall record the Plaintiff’s attached list No. 2.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 16, 1999, the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of Defendant B was completed on April 16, 199 with respect to the real estate No. 1 in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “the building No. 1 in this case”), and on August 22, 2003, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant C and D was completed on the ground of donation No. 7237 of the receipt of the Young District Court Young-gu District Court Youngdon Branch on August 18, 2003, and on May 29, 1995, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant E was completed on May 29, 195 with respect to the real estate No. 2 in the separate sheet No.
B. Around August 20, 1999, Defendant B drafted a letter stating that “The instant building was registered in the name of the principal, but the ownership is to be jointly owned between South and North Korea” (hereinafter “instant letter”).
C. F was married to M (Death on December 24, 1963), and was married to N,O, P, J and Defendant E, Defendant B, and Plaintiff, and died on November 16, 2007, and Defendant C and D were children of Defendant B.
【In the absence of a dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entry of Gap evidence 2-1, 2, 5, and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B, C, and D
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion No. 1 building is the Plaintiff’s mother’s proprietary property and Defendant B’s mother, and Defendant B arbitrarily completed the registration of ownership preservation on the above No. 1 building.
Accordingly, Defendant B, upon entering the instant letter, prepared to have the ownership of the building No. 1 of this case as joint ownership between South and North Korea, including the Plaintiff, and subsequently donated the building No. 1 to Defendant C and D, which are their children. Defendant C and D (hereinafter “Defendant C, etc.”) knew that the building No. 1 of this case was joint ownership between South and North Korea, including the Plaintiff, and received a donation in collusion with the Defendant B, such donation contract is null and void as a false declaration of agreement.
Therefore, registration of preservation of ownership in the name of Defendant B as to the building No. 1 of this case is registration invalid, and Defendant C, etc. based thereon.