logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.04.13 2016가단84166
가등기말소
Text

1. The Defendant shall support the Plaintiff with respect to the “Yyang-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City City C forest land 7228m2” at the Seoyang-gu District Court.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, on April 18, 1980, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the sale on April 12, 1980, with respect to “the instant forest land” (hereinafter “the instant forest land”) of “Yanyang-dong, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu” (hereinafter “the instant forest”).

With respect to the forest land of this case, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer was completed on April 18, 1980 by designating the defendant as the right holder on April 18, 1980, when the ownership transfer registration under the plaintiff's name was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As to whether a pre-sale contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff delegated only the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant, and the Defendant asserted that the pre-sale contract was completed by forging the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression and seal, and that the pre-sale contract was duly established, and that the Defendant completed the provisional registration upon delegation by the Plaintiff.

Although there is no dispute between the parties that the seals affixed to the Plaintiff’s Preamble and Preliminary (No. B. 1) are the Plaintiff, there is no dispute between the parties that the above seals are affixed by the Defendant, and there is no dispute between the parties. As such, the Defendant was delegated by the Plaintiff with regard to the preparation of a

As to the fact that the Defendant was authorized to affix the Plaintiff’s seal, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s signature only by means of evidence Nos. 2, 7, 13, and 22, the above pre-sale agreement is made by a person without authority, and it cannot be used as evidence because it has no effect. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the pre-sale agreement was made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the forest of this case

B. Whether title trust is held by the Defendant, the forest land of this case consisting of F’s lineal descendants from among the clan members who set up Dmp 14 years old E as a mid-term group of Dmp 14 years old E.

arrow