logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2012.02.03 2011나13082
소유권말소등기
Text

1. All appeals by the Defendant (Plaintiffs) are dismissed;

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

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are either not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged by adding the whole purport of pleadings to the statements in evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 11.

The defendant clan was elected as the representative of the defendant clan at the general meeting held on November 29, 2004.

B. On September 2, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the defendant clan seeking cancellation of the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant clan, which was made on each of the above lands under the separate list (hereinafter referred to as "each of the above lands") by asserting that the land was originally owned by the plaintiffs and theO, D, E, and F. When the special measures on the registration of real estate ownership transfer were implemented around 1993, the defendant clan issued a false certificate of guarantee and a false confirmation document and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future.

C. However, at the time, the representative of the defendant clan did not submit any written reply even though the plaintiff was served with the plaintiff's complaint. This court rendered a judgment subject to a favorable judgment on April 29, 2009. The above judgment became final and conclusive on May 26, 2009.

On July 24, 2009, G filed a lawsuit for retrial of this case on behalf of the defendant clan by asserting that there was a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)3 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a retrial suit

A. The plaintiffs asserted that ① a plaintiff filed a lawsuit on behalf of the defendant clan cannot be deemed a legitimate representative of the defendant clan, and ② the defendant clan asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful since the defendant clan did not go through a resolution of the general assembly pursuant to Article 276 (1) of the Civil Code in order to raise a new trial on each of the land of this case which is collectively owned by an association which is not a juristic person.

As to this, the defendant.

arrow