logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.25 2016가단5079577
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the land owned by the instant clan, which was held in title by C C (hereinafter “instant clan”) with D, E, and F, and the Plaintiff’s father purchased the instant land from the instant clan around January 1, 1945, around January 1, 1945.

G Deceased on February 25, 1980, and the Plaintiff donated or succeeded to the instant land.

The defendant, without any title, completed the registration of ownership preservation for the land of this case by the Jung-gu District Court's Government Registry No. 24409 of April 30, 1996, which was received on April 30, 1996. Thus, in order to preserve the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer for the land of this case, the plaintiff seeks to cancel the above registration of ownership preservation by subrogation

2. In a creditor subrogation lawsuit, where the right of the creditor to be preserved by subrogation is not acknowledged, the creditor himself/herself becomes the plaintiff and the debtor's right to the third debtor is no longer entitled to exercise the right to the third debtor, and such subrogation lawsuit shall be dismissed in an unlawful manner.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da14339 delivered on June 24, 1994, etc.) The plaintiff asserts that his father G purchased the land of this case from the clan around January 1, 1945, the right to claim the transfer registration of ownership against the clan of this case as the preserved right of the creditor subrogation lawsuit of this case, and therefore, whether the above preserved right is recognized or not.

G It seems that it was consistent with the fact that Gap purchased the land of this case from the clan of this case around January 1, 1945, each of the evidence Nos. 12, 13-1, 14-1, 15, 16, and 19 stated in the above sales contract is confirmed that the plaintiff did not neglect at the time of the sales contract, or did not experience directly by the people who did not know at the time of the purchase contract, and the detailed contents of the above sales contract are also stated.

arrow