logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.11.24 2015가합178
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiffs' primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The F died on January 4, 2015, and his heir G, children, Plaintiffs, Defendant, and H exist.

B. On July 14, 2014, prior to the death of F, a notary public drafted a testamentary deed No. 384 of 2014 (hereinafter “instant testamentary deed”) on the following purport: “At the request of F, a witness I and J shall participate, the executor shall be determined by J, and the executor shall testament the Defendant with each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, F (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

C. Following the death of F, on the basis of the notarial deed of this case, the ownership transfer registration on the ground of testamentary gift (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) was completed on March 12, 2015 by the Chuncheon District Court No. 8436 on March 12, 2015, which was based on the notarial deed of this case.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion F is that it is impossible to accept the contents stated in the notarial deed of this case due to the lack of adequate understanding of the intent of the will at the time of the will of this case and the ability to obtain such understanding to the extent of normal recognition.

Therefore, the notarial deed of this case is limited to “the document F puts his signature and seal on a document written in written form,” not to “the document written in written form by a notary public, after making an oral statement of the intent of the will,” and the preparation of such notarial deed violates the method stipulated in Article 1068 of the Civil Act, and thus the will of this case is null and void, and the ownership transfer registration of this case made by the void will of this case is null and void as a registration made without any legal cause.

Therefore, the defendant's share in attached Form 2, which is the share of the plaintiffs' share among each real estate of this case, to F's heir.

arrow