logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2019.06.19 2018가단52083
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership under the name of the Defendant on May 11, 198 with respect to the land of this case or the instant house (hereinafter “instant land”) with respect to the land of 119 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “instant house”).

B. On November 9, 1980, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of E was completed with respect to D- 109 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “D land”) adjacent to the instant land, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of F was completed on September 23, 1995, and the ownership was changed several times thereafter on June 21, 2017.

C. On April 2018, the Plaintiff started construction of the pole on the part (B) part (B) of the ship connected each point of the instant land in sequence of 2, 3, 4, 8, and 1m2 (hereinafter “instant dispute part”), among the instant land, on the ground that the instant dispute part is located on the instant land, and the Defendant installed bricks around the instant land on the ground that the said part is located in the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 7 and 7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the survey and appraisal of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. From the time when the Plaintiff’s assertion D and the instant housing were newly constructed in around 1967, a fence was installed to form a boundary between D and D’s land, and there was a gate column allowing access to D’s land and housing in the dispute part.

Accordingly, the previous owners of D land occupied the part of the dispute in this case with the boundary of the aforementioned wall and gate, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the possession. The Plaintiff acquired the prescription of possession on September 23, 2015 after the lapse of 20 years from September 23, 1995, when the Plaintiff acquired the F’s ownership, which was the starting point of the acquisition.

arrow