logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.30 2018가단5189560
소유권이전등기 말소 청구의 소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims against defendant A and the plaintiffs' claims against defendant D are dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 6, 197 on April 29, 197 with respect to the land of Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu E site (hereinafter “instant land”), and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on December 12, 1987 on December 12, 1987 on December 12, 1987.

(hereinafter the Defendants’ registration of ownership transfer is “each of the instant ownership transfer”). B.

The F died on March 22, 1961 and jointly succeeded to the Plaintiff, B, I, J, and K, who is the spouse, due to the death of the G on February 21, 2013.

However, I and J filed an application with the Seoul Family Court 2013 Ma-Ma2298, and K was decided to accept each inheritance waiver trial with the Seoul Family Court 2013 Ma-Ma4456.

[Grounds for recognition] Each entry (including paper numbers) in Gap 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the plaintiffs' claims

A. The gist of the claim was that the Plaintiffs inherited the instant land owned by F.

The registration of the name of Defendant C, among the registration of the transfer of each of the instant cases, is a registration of invalidation that has been completed more than 16 years from the date the F died without the inheritance registration, and that does not fit for the substantive relationship, and the registration of the name of Defendant C, which was completed based on the registration of

Therefore, the Plaintiffs seek the cancellation of the registration of each transfer of ownership of this case as a preservation act against the Defendants.

B. However, the only reason for the assertion by the Plaintiffs is that each of the instant registration of ownership transfer is invalid, which does not coincide with the substantive relationship, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in Eul 1 through 8 (including the paper numbers), the ownership of the instant land shall be transferred from L on June 12, 1954 to M, from M on August 1, 1957 to F, from F on December 28, 1967 to N, from N on April 29, 197 to Defendant C, and from Defendant C on December 18, 1987, to Defendant C in order.

arrow