소유권말소등기
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasons why the court of first instance is to explain concerning this case are the reasons why the defendant's argument in the trial is identical to the reasons why the court of first instance except for the defendant's additional determination in paragraph 2 below, and it is difficult to conclude a different conclusion only with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 24 and 26-1 of the evidence No. 26 of the court of first instance submitted in the trial. Thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance
2. The Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit brought by the guardian is unlawful in the absence of the deceased’s capacity at the time of the instant lawsuit.
According to Article 62(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, where a legal representative has no legal representative or his/her legal representative is unable to exercise his/her right of representation, a person intending to conduct litigation against a quasi-incompetent may apply for the appointment of a special representative, and even in cases of filing a lawsuit against a person who has no litigation capacity due to his/her de facto loss of mental capacity, a special representative may be appointed (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da8986, Jul. 27, 1993) and Article 950 of the former Civil Act (amended by Act No. 10429, Mar. 7, 2011). In light of the foregoing legal principles, a guardian may conduct litigation on behalf of a ward with the consent of family council in lieu of the ward with the consent of family council. In full view of the above legal principles, a guardian, even without his/her capacity
Therefore, the defendant's principal safety defense, which is based on the premise that the guardian of a quasi-incompetent cannot conduct litigation on behalf of the ward who has no capacity to do so, is not reasonable in itself.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal against the plaintiffs is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.