logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2012.07.25 2011가단32774
소유권이전등기말소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of premise;

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on November 7, 1947 with respect to the land stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. Upon the death of E in around 1963, on December 29, 1975, the transfer registration corresponding to E’s respective inheritance shares was completed in F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and the Plaintiff’s respective inheritance shares on the ground of inheritance on February 3, 1963. The transfer registration of ownership corresponding to E’s respective inheritance shares was completed on the ground of sale on December 29, 1975, No. 13279 of the receipt date of December 29, 1975, and on December 22, 1975, the transfer registration of ownership was completed in D (hereinafter “the first registration”).

C. After D’s death in around 1997, the registration of transfer of ownership (hereinafter “registration 2 of this case”) was completed on November 13, 200 with respect to the land of this case as of November 13, 200 as of November 28, 1997 due to inheritance due to a consultation division as of December 28, 1997.

On the other hand, on November 7, 1947, E completed the ownership transfer registration on the land of this case, and on December 29, 1975, D immediately completed the ownership transfer registration without the ownership transfer registration of the heir.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, 7 through 11

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The registration No. 1 of this case is a registration of invalidation of cause, according to the circumstances as shown below below by the plaintiff's assertion, and the registration of invalidity of cause is a registration of invalidation of cause No. 2 of this case based on the registration No.

In other words, the Plaintiff’s deceased E and its inheritors did not sell the instant land.

In addition to the instant land (the previous lot number is M; hereinafter referred to as “instant land No. 2”), E died around 1963 from among the possession of N (former lot numberO) land and P (former lot number Q) land (hereinafter referred to as “Dispute No. 3 land”) and the instant land (hereinafter referred to as “Dispute No. 1 and No. 2”), E died on the basis of around 1963.

(2).

arrow