소유권이전등기말소등
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The Plaintiffs are the successors of H’s basic facts.
(Plaintiff A is the spouse of H, and the rest of the Plaintiffs are the children of H). Meanwhile, the current status of the division of the area of 957 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun I and the registrant of each real estate are as follows:
(hereinafter referred to as “Bi-ri and parcel number” is specified, and the land before subdivision is referred to as “Bi-ri,” and as to the land after subdivision, the current parcel number is specified, and as to the land after subdivision, K 174 square meters is referred to as “instant land”). The instant land was combined with L land on October 5, 2016.
On December 1, 1976, the title holder of the division, registered on September 19, 1990, and on October 28, 1997, he sold the land in question to the Defendant on July 26, 2016 (the cause of sale on April 5, 197), 1, 241 square meters, N264 square meters G G-7, 1965 (the cause of repayment on December 30, 195) and 349 square meters K, 174 square meters (the cause of sale on December 26, 2016) on December 18, 1980 (the cause of sale on April 5, 197). < Amended by Act No. 27494, Apr. 7, 1965; Act No. 14568, Jul. 26, 2016>
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The summary of the Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) H purchased the I land from Defendant G on April 5, 1970 before subdivision. 2) The owner of K’s land before subdivision is not Defendant G but H.
B. First of all, we examine whether H purchased the I land before subdivision from Defendant G.
H The fact that the registration of ownership transfer is completed pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 3094) with respect to I land and M land after division is as seen earlier.
The above registration is presumed to have been completed in accordance with the lawful procedures prescribed by the Act, and is in line with the substantive legal relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da39258, Oct. 12, 2001). However, such presumption is only limited to the relevant real estate subject to registration.