logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.07.25 2018나37206
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. In light of the legal principles as indicated in the table below of the judgment of the court of first instance, even if the evidence examined by this court is presented, it is difficult to change the factual relations and judgment acknowledged by the judgment of the court of

(A) The court’s decision is based on the reasoning of the first instance judgment, and thus, based on the text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is reasonable to see the reasoning of the judgment of the court.

Even if the name of the owner is entered in the old land cadastre restored before the enforcement of the Cadastral Act (wholly amended by Act No. 2801 of Dec. 31, 1975), such entry is not recognized as a right presumption. The entry is written as a prop on the farmland list, which is the fundamental document of the procedure for distributing farmland under the former Farmland Reform Act (amended by Act No. 31 of Jun. 21, 1949, and repealed by Act No. 4817 of Dec. 22, 1994).

That is not presumed to have ownership under the substantive law, and the distributed farmland repayment ledger or distributed farmland ledger, which is a document prepared to enter matters necessary for repayment after the completion of the procedure for the confirmation of distribution farmland, shall not be recognized as the presumption of changes in rights.

Therefore, a person who is not an owner of land in the old land cadastre or the distribution farmland register is registered as an owner.

Even if so, the nominal owner cannot be presumed to be the owner.

However, there is no limitation to using the entries of the former land cadastre or farmland distribution-related documents as data for fact-finding on the alteration of rights, and there is no limitation to using them as data for fact-finding on the alteration of rights, not only the documents that confirm the farmland subject to distribution, such as farmland register and the distribution farmland register, or the repayment register, but also the farmland was purchased from the State.

arrow