logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.12.20 2017가단1363
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff clan is a clan that makes D, the 24 descendants of which are the joint ancestor from the time of the clan C. The plaintiff clan is a clan that is the joint ancestor.

B. On May 29, 1918, the Defendant: (a) was investigated on May 29, 1918, the Fri-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter “Fri-gun”); (b) was transferred to H, the ownership of the said forest in the forest was transferred to the Defendant’s Ha, who was the Defendant’s son.

C. On December 6, 1971, H completed registration of preservation of ownership in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Forest Ownership with respect to G forest land of 8,727 square meters.

On November 4, 1983, G forest land was sold to KRW 922,500 for the price in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, by dividing and changing the land category of 205 square meters from G forest land into 8,727 square meters, and the area of G forest was 8,522 square meters.

E. On November 25, 2004, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 28, 1997 with respect to G forest land of 8,522 square meters due to inheritance due to a consultation division.

F. On November 14, 2014, G forest land was divided into J forest land of 910 square meters in G forest land of 8,522 square meters and the area of G forest was 7,612 square meters in size.

(hereinafter above G Forest and J Forest and hereinafter referred to as “instant forest”).

G. At least 50 members of the tombstones for the clan of this case exist in the forest of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 8, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) or video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the forest land of this case was registered under title trust with the Plaintiff’s clan E as the property of the clan.

Since the Defendant succeeded to the status of trustee E, the Defendant, as a title trustee of the forest of this case, should implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on the termination of title trust to the Plaintiff, the title truster.

B. In order to recognize that the land of the clan 1 is owned by a clan, and that it was trusted to a clan member or another person under the name of the clan at the time of the circumstance, there is an organic organization to some extent at the time

arrow