logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원논산지원 2016.12.08 2015가단2860
공유물수거 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant and the designated parties) and the designated parties are the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the 1.752 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun Co., Ltd.

Reasons

1. The instant land was originally owned by the network D, and is currently owned by Nonparty F, G, and H, the heir of the Plaintiff, the designated parties, the Defendant, and the network E due to inheritance.

Family relations and co-ownership shares of the parties are as listed in the following table:

The heir’s first heir’s shares in the inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based inheritance-based deceased 3/19 F 2/121/1064 G 6/1064 H 6/1064 G 6/1064 G 2/193/1064 M 193/1064 G 2/193/1064 designated children and 2/193/1064 designated children and 13/1064 designated children and 2/193/1064 children and 193/1064 children and 2/193/1064 children and 13/1064 children and 193/1064 N 13/1064 children and 13/104 N 14/1064 of the aggregate of the arguments are without dispute.

2. The purport of the main claim against the land of this case is to collect trees planted by the defendant on the land of this case, deliver the land of this case, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, since the defendant acquired ownership of the entire land of this case, and thus, the defendant must follow the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer in the future as to the inheritance shares of the plaintiff and the designated parties. Thus, whether the defendant acquired ownership of the land of this case, the main claim against the land of this case is common issues in the main claim and counterclaim.

Therefore, first, the issue of whether the Defendant acquired the ownership of the entire land of this case is whether or not.

When the deceased died between the deceased and the deceased around June 1989 (hereinafter “the deceased”) around the time of marriage of the Defendant, the Defendant donated the instant land to the Defendant.

arrow