beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.11.20 2014가단31450

소유권이전등기

Text

1. As to each of the plaintiffs' share of 2/11 of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, the defendant inherited on June 15, 2014.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on June 15, 2014, and his heir is the Plaintiffs and F, who are the wife.

B. Each of the instant real estate was owned by the Deceased. Of each of the instant real estate, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 4, 2014 by the registration office of the Gwangju District Court No. 45365, Feb. 27, 2014; and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 21, 2014 by the registration office of the Gwangju District Court No. 7873, Mar. 21, 2014 (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

C. There is no other inherited property at the time of the deceased’s death.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including additional number)

2. The parties' assertion

A. In the plaintiffs' assertion, although the deceased did not have donated each of the instant real estate to the defendant, the defendant prepared a donation contract with the deceased's resident registration certificate and a certificate of personal seal affixed to the deceased, and completed each of the instant real estate, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the premise that the deceased donated each of the instant real estate to the defendant is invalid. As such, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the premise that the deceased made a donation of each of the instant real estate to the defendant, and the defendant is obligated to perform the registration procedure for transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the premise that the deceased made a donation of each of the instant real estate to the defendant, and even if the deceased made a donation to the defendant, such donation is invalidated to the extent that it infringes on the legal reserve

B. The Defendant’s assertion is around February 2014.