logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.09.07 2017나3114
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 2008, the Plaintiff borrowed 193,00,000 won in total to Defendant D several times, and on September 5, 2014, the Plaintiff received a certified document stating that “The Plaintiff shall pay in installments the above loan amounting to 120,000,000 won until December 30, 2014, and 73,000,000,000 won until June 30, 2015,” and on the same day, received a written statement from Defendant D that “I will dispose of G apartment 101,901,000,000 won in total, if the obligation of the said certified document is not fulfilled.”

B. On December 30, 2011, the instant real estate had been registered for transfer of ownership from Defendant B to Defendant C on December 7, 201 as the transaction price of KRW 365,000,000 on December 7, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate from Defendant B, the transferor owner, Defendant D, Defendant C, only in the name of the registration, and the registration title trust agreement between Defendant C and D is null and void.

The Plaintiff, as to Defendant D, has a claim for a loan of KRW 193,00,00,000 against Defendant D, in subrogation of Defendant D’s rights, Defendant C’s primary responsibility is to cancel the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate, and Defendant B demanded Defendant D to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on the pre-sale agreement with respect to the instant real estate. If Defendant B and C were to be valid due to the failure of Defendant B to know about the title trust between Defendant C and D, if the instant real estate sales agreement between Defendant B and C is valid, the acquisition of the instant real estate would be unjust.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, in subrogation of the Defendant D’s right as the debtor, filed a preliminary claim with Defendant C to pay KRW 85,200,000 as the purchase fund of the instant real estate received from Defendant D and its delay damages.

B. As to the title trust agreement on the instant real estate at the time of the instant real estate sales contract by Defendant B.

arrow