beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.04.05 2017가합8908

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by M who is represented by the plaintiff.

Reasons

Plaintiff

The main point of the argument is that the plaintiff is a clan similar organization comprised of men over 20 years of age among the descendants of N 21 years of age.

The Plaintiff each real estate listed in the separate sheet, owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) under title trust with 1/4 shares, respectively, to P, Q and net R, and net H, a constituent member of the Plaintiff.

On October 2, 2016, the Plaintiff convened an extraordinary general meeting and appointed M as the Plaintiff’s representative, terminated the title trust on the instant real estate, and decided to complete the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant resolution on the extraordinary general meeting”. Accordingly, Defendant I, J, K, and L, the heir of Defendant B, C, D, E, F, G, and network H, who are the heir of the deceased, are obligated to implement the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership on the ground of termination of title trust with respect to the respective claims stated in the respective shares of inheritance among the instant real estate, which correspond to the respective shares of inheritance.

If the basic identity of facts alleged by the parties is maintained in relation to the legal nature of a clan which is a party to the lawsuit of this case, regardless of the legal arguments of the parties concerning the legal nature of the clan which is a party to the lawsuit of this case, it does not constitute a change of the party, and in such a case, the court shall confirm whether the substance of the organization alleged by the parties is a clan or a similar organization to a clan, or a joint mediation, based on the facts examined ex officio, and shall evaluate differently the legal nature of the lawsuit, and shall determine

(Supreme Court Decision 2008Da45378 Decided October 9, 2008). The plaintiff asserted in the complaint that the plaintiff is a unique meaning of clan consisting of members of the O's descendants, and in the preparatory brief dated November 21, 2017, the plaintiff argued that it is a clan similar organization consisting of only 20 years of age or older among members of the O's descendants under the articles of incorporation.

However, it can be known in light of the whole purport of records and arguments.