beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.03.17 2013가단59426

소유권이전등기말소청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings);

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Plaintiff on November 28, 1977 for the real estate listed in the attached list, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Defendant, the wife of the Plaintiff on July 31, 2007 on the ground of donation on August 1, 2007.

B. The registration of ownership preservation was completed on October 5, 1993 in the name of the Plaintiff on the 2 real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on July 31, 2007 on the ground of donation on August 1, 2007.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate” by aggregating each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the registration of ownership transfer in the Defendant’s name completed on the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as “instant registration”).

On July 31, 2007, the registration of this case was applied for by a power of attorney under the name of the plaintiff, and the defendant affixed the plaintiff's seal imprint certificate on the side of the plaintiff's column among the donation contract attached to the application for registration.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. On July 31, 2007, the Plaintiff, a ground for registration of this case, obtained a certificate of the Plaintiff’s seal impression without the Plaintiff’s delegation or consent, and the Plaintiff’s registration of this case based on it is null and void as it is the registration of this case’s real estate donation to the Defendant. Thus, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff should implement the procedure for cancellation registration of this case’s registration. On the Defendant’s request, the Defendant consented to the Plaintiff’s application for the registration of this case. On July 31, 2007, the Defendant granted his resident registration certificate to the Defendant to make the application for the registration of this case. Thus, the Plaintiff’s registration of this case cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s request as a legitimate registration.

(b) single stopboard s top. 2 to 5.