logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원제천지원 2015.03.26 2014가단4855
소유권이전등기
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 7, 2008, the Defendant completed preservation registration in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate regarding each land listed in [Attachment List Nos. 1 and 4].

B. As to each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2 and 3, the Defendant’s father K completed the preservation registration on December 6, 1979 in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 24, 1998 on each of the above land due to the inheritance by consultation or division.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. On October 17, 1990, the plaintiffs purchased, occupied, and managed each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the "land of this case") from the time when L died on October 21, 1970, and died on October 17, 1990 from the time when L owned, occupied, and managed the land of this case as L's heir from the time when L owned, managed the land of this case. Since at least from October 17, 190, the plaintiffs occupied the land of this case in peace and openly and openly with their intention to own the land of this case, the acquisition by prescription was completed on October 17, 2010 after the expiration of 20 years thereafter, the defendant has no obligation to support the plaintiffs as to the registration of the transfer of ownership due to the completion of the inheritance calculation shares listed in the separate sheet among the land listed in the separate sheet, but there is no evidence to support the above facts.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiffs' claim of this case is without merit.

arrow