소유권이전등기
1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The first instance court dismissed the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims and accepted the conjunctive claims. Accordingly, the defendants appealed against the conjunctive claims. Thus, the subject of this court's trial is limited to the conjunctive claims.
2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as follows: (a) the Defendants’ assertion in the trial of the first instance is to be cited as “ December 21, 2010,” and the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance is to be cited as “the December 21, 2010,” and (b) the Defendants’ assertion in the trial of the first instance is to be added as stated in the part of the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it is to be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. The Defendants asserts that the Incheon Metropolitan City Land Planning Ordinance provides that “if land is partitioned within an agricultural and forest area and natural environment conservation area without obtaining permission, etc. under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, it shall be at least 200 square meters in size.” However, the land portion in this case is within an agricultural and forest area and its size is only 165 square meters and thus it cannot be divided, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.
However, even if the Incheon Metropolitan City Ordinance on Land Planning provides that the above provision shall not be divided below the area prescribed by the Ordinance as above, it does not purport to limit division and transfer of ownership due to legitimate cause of the site itself (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu7519, Nov. 12, 1996). Therefore, the grounds asserted by the Defendants do not constitute a legal justifiable reason for refusing the Plaintiff’s claim.
Therefore, the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.
4. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and the defendants' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.