logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2016.01.15 2015가단108314
소유권확인
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 1, 1967, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the deceased C to purchase the instant land from the deceased C,00 won.

B. At present, the instant land is indicated as unregistered real estate or as indicated in the land cadastre of this case as the first owner by the deceased C’s father, and the Plaintiff’s transfer of ownership on December 30, 1967.

C. On July 2008, the Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of destruction or recovery of the instant land with the Ganwon District Court, asserting that the registration of ownership transfer was completed at the time of purchase of the instant land, and that it was currently destroyed and lost.

However, around August 2008, the above registry office sent to the Plaintiff a reply to the purport that, because there is no data to presume the matters to be registered in the previous registry with respect to the land in this case, it is unclear whether the registration exists, such as registration of preservation of ownership, etc., and that registration of preservation of ownership has been completed under the special law under the name of F on February 1, 1982 with respect to the land divided from the land in this case on February 10, 1954 from the land in this case, the registration of preservation of ownership was completed under the name of F on December 1, 1982.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 (including a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The gist of the assertion is that D is the first owner in the land cadastre of this case, and that the Plaintiff was transferred the ownership of this case from D on December 30, 1967.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case does not constitute exceptional cases where the claim for confirmation of ownership of land against the State is in interest of confirmation because there is no registered titleholder of land cadastre or it is unknown who is the registrant of land cadastre.

B. Determination 1-related legal principles.

arrow