(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.06.19 2018재나30029

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.06.19 2018재나30029

소유권말소등기

Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

The following facts that have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review are apparent or apparent in records in this court:

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants seeking the implementation of the procedure for cancellation of the registration of each transfer of ownership as to the instant land and the delivery, etc. of the instant land (Seoul District Court 201Gadan51851), but the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on January 6, 2012.

Therefore, the Plaintiff appealed to the Daegu District Court. On July 18, 2012, the said court rendered a judgment for review to dismiss the Plaintiff’s appeal, and the judgment for review became final and conclusive on August 8, 2012.

According to the records as to the legitimacy of a new trial proceeding against Defendant B, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial on February 19, 2018. On May 25, 2018, the said court rendered an order to deposit KRW 14,095,966 with the Plaintiff within 14 days from the date of notifying the Plaintiff of the security of litigation costs pursuant to Article 117(2) of the Civil Procedure Act (hereinafter “instant order to provide security”), and the original copy of the decision was served on the Plaintiff on May 29, 2018; ② the Plaintiff filed an immediate appeal against the instant order to provide security on June 14, 2018, but the Plaintiff filed an immediate appeal with Supreme Court Decision 2018Ma5675, Jun. 14, 2018; on September 7, 2018, the said order to dismiss the foregoing immediate appeal became final and conclusive on September 18, 2018; and ③ the fact that the Plaintiff did not provide the instant order within the date of final determination.

According to the above facts, since the plaintiff did not provide security within the period of providing security under the order to provide security of this case, this part of the lawsuit for retrial is unlawful.

The plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of a retrial against the defendant Sung-gu

참조조문

-민사소송법 제117조 제2항

참조판례

-대구지방법원 2012.1.6. 선고 2011가단51851 판결

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2019.02.13 2018재나99

-대구지방법원 2019.06.19 2018재나158

-울산지방법원 2019.02.13 2018재나235

-울산지방법원 2019.01.23 2018재나13

-울산지방법원 2019.01.23 2017재나825