소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Basic facts
A. 6,527 square meters of H forest in Dong-gu, Gwangju, Dong-gu (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was partially divided and thereafter owned by the Republic of Korea and Gwangju Metropolitan City; hereinafter “the instant real estate”). The Plaintiff’s lighting division was purchased from J on May 24, 194. On December 14, 1971, in accordance with the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Forest and Forest Rights (Act No. 211; hereinafter “Special Measures Act”), the ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “the instant transfer registration”) was completed on May 2, 1962 due to the sale on May 2, 1962.
B. Since then, on February 16, 2004 with respect to the portion of 1/3 of the instant real estate, the ownership transfer registration was completed on July 6, 2015 for the remaining 2/3 shares due to each gift by Defendant G, Defendant G, and each gift.
C. The deceased I (the deceased on April 24, 194) maintained the deceased L (the deceased on October 29, 1994), the deceased M& (the life in 1929), women N(the life in 1932), women's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's o's ma (the father in 1945 o's o's o's 1947) and the deceased on July 9, 2003, the plaintiffs inherited the deceased M's o's o's o's o'
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including the number of evidence available), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the registration of the transfer of this case was made on May 2, 1962 by the date of acquisition is not subject to special provisions. ② Since I, the seller, at that time, had already died, the cause of acquisition stated in the letter of guarantee or the letter of confirmation is also false, and ③ the relatives who could not dispose of the real estate of this case to a third party are merely the land trusted in trust to K, in light of the fact that the presumption of registration was broken.
Therefore, in the name of the Defendants, which was based on the registration of transfer in the name of invalid K.