beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.03 2018나9157

분묘발굴

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of a donation made on June 22, 2016, with respect to 197 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. Of the instant land, one grave (hereinafter referred to as “instant grave”) is installed on the ground of 30 square meters (a) part (i) of the instant land connected in sequence with each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1, among the instant land.

C. The instant grave was installed as a grave of G by H, who is the south of H, and H was placed as a child of I (Nam), Defendant, J, K, K, L, M, N,O, P, and died on February 16, 1998.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts to the effect that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, since the defendant did not have any right to dispose of the grave of this case since he was the resident of the grave of this case I, the defendant does not have the right to dispose of the grave of this case.

The defendant's main defense to the effect that the plaintiff's standing to sue in the action for performance is replaced by the plaintiff's claim itself, and that the judgment is absorbed into the judgment of the propriety of the claim, is legitimate (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da18451, Nov. 28, 1995). The defendant's main defense to the effect that the person alleged as the obligor for performance has excavated the grave of this case and contests the standing to sue in the lawsuit of this case, which is the lawsuit for the execution of the claim for delivery of the part (a) of this case

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff is the owner of the instant land, and since the Defendant illegally occupied the part of the instant land, which is a part of the instant land, due to the management of the instant grave, etc., the Plaintiff sought the transfer of the instant graves and the instant (A) portion.

B. In order to file a claim for the removal of a grave based on ownership of the forest land, it shall be filed against the person who has the right to manage and dispose of the grave, since the installation of the grave was accumulated.