beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.12.20 2017나32167

소유권이전등기

Text

1. All appeals by the Defendants against the Plaintiff are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the reasoning of the court of first instance is written or added as follows.

2. On the second page 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the term “witness” in the first instance shall be read as “a witness of the court of first instance”.

The "Witness" in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be the "Witness of the court of first instance".

On the third and third sides of the judgment of the first instance, "in addition," shall be as follows:

"In addition, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the original registration certificate at the time of the registration of preservation of ownership on the land of this case was kept by the Plaintiff, ② the property tax, etc. imposed on the land of this case appears to have been paid continuously by the Plaintiff (it seems to have been paid by the Defendants to claim ownership late in the situation where the restoration of the name of the land of this case was at issue). ③ Even according to the Defendants’ assertion, the land of this case was continuously managed by the F, which was the cause of the clan. There was no evidence suggesting that the Defendants requested to deliver the land to F, or claimed for rent, etc.; ④ The minutes, etc. of the Plaintiff clan’s ordinary meeting were recorded before the Plaintiff clan was owned by the Plaintiff clan, and the land of this case was stated to be changed in its name as soon as possible, ⑤ the Defendants came to organize the land of this case with the Plaintiff clan in the year of 190 and the Plaintiff’s ordinary general meeting, but did not raise any objection against it.