beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Forest land stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter referred to as “forest land of this case”) is not subject to dispute between the parties concerned, where the Plaintiff and Defendant B share 3/8 shares, and Defendant C share 2/8 shares.
On March 9, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendants for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground that the part of the claim for the instant forest claim (A) among the forest land (hereinafter “the instant forest land”) was jointly owned by the Plaintiff by telephone with Defendant B, on the ground that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant B on the partition of common property with the purport that the portion of the instant forest land should be owned solely by the Plaintiff.
As to this, on March 7, 2016, Defendant B delegated a divisional survey by the Plaintiff and Defendant C, and the part of the instant forest was proved to have been divided into that Defendant B was the sole owner of the instant forest.
Therefore, we examine whether there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant B on March 9, 2016 on the division of co-ownership of the above contents.
The evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 revealed as follows: (a) Defendant C and the Plaintiff, as of March 7, 2016, prepared and sent to Defendant B a power of attorney to delegate all acts regarding the request for cadastral surveying, on-site entry, etc. against the delegated person for the Korea Land and Land Information Corporation as Defendant B; (b) the Plaintiff wanted to attend the said power of attorney and to identify the location of the land; and (c) Defendant B applied for subdivision surveying by indicating the instant forest portion as his own sole ownership at that time; and (d) Defendant B applied for subdivision surveying on March 9, 2016; and (c) Defendant E and Defendant B made the call between the Plaintiff’s agent E and Defendant B that the “Advance portion” of the instant forest was the Plaintiff.
However, the forest part of this case is the forest part of this case.