(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.06.09 2014가단14909

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.06.09 2014가단14909

소유권이전등기말소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On July 6, 2006, the Network D used the Plaintiff’s seal without the Plaintiff’s consent and made a contract as if the Plaintiff, which was the Plaintiff, donated to the Defendant a 66.0 square meters worth of 66.0 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of cement block structure C, cement block 1, which was owned by the Plaintiff, to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff received documents, such as the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression, the certified copy of resident registration, etc. from the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the deceased’s name on July 10, 2006.

B. The Deceased died on February 18, 2014, and the Defendant and the designated parties succeeded to each share in the attached inheritance shares.

C. Although the Plaintiff did not have donated the instant real estate to the Deceased, the registration of transfer of ownership made in its name due to the donation on July 6, 2006 on the instant real estate by the Deceased is null and void. As such, the Defendant and the designated parties who succeeded to the deceased’s property are liable to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of transfer of ownership as to each inheritance share of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant

2. Where the registration of ownership transfer has been made, not only the third party but also the former owner is presumed to have acquired ownership on the ground of lawful cause of registration (Supreme Court Decision 97Da40100, Dec. 12, 1997). The fact that the registration of ownership transfer was made on the ground of donation on July 6, 2006 on the real estate in this case does not conflict between the parties, and thus, the deceased is presumed to have lawfully acquired ownership after being donated the real estate in this case from the plaintiff on July 6, 2006, and the fact that the registration of ownership transfer was made without any cause is insufficient to acknowledge the ownership transfer.

참조판례

-대법원 1997. 12. 12. 선고 97다40100 판결

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2020.11.10 2019가단3472

-서울동부지방법원 2016.10.20 2016가합103024

-울산지방법원 2016.05.12 2013가합3725

-수원지방법원평택지원 2015.11.04 2014가합8495

-광주지방법원 2015.01.30 2014가합5915