logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원정읍지원 2019.01.09 2018가합72
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s respective claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Appointor D is the spouse, the Plaintiff, the Appointor F, and the Defendants of the deceased E (the deceased on February 18, 2018, hereinafter “the deceased”).

(hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiffs” in total. B.

The registration of ownership transfer in Defendant B’s name was completed on December 28, 2012 by the former District Court Registry No. 2635 of the Seoul District Court, No. 26520, which was received on December 28, 2012, with respect to the instant real estate among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and the separate sheet No. 2, which was owned by the deceased (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). As to the instant real estate among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and the separate sheet No. 2, the ownership transfer of the instant real estate was completed on December 31, 2012 by the former District Court’s registration office No. 2635, Dec. 31, 2012, based on the sale and purchase as of December 20, 2012.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that, in light of the following facts: (a) the deceased did not have any fact at all indicated on the disposal of each real estate of this case; (b) although the grounds for registration were indicated as the sale and purchase, there was no payment of the purchase price; and (c) the deceased was aged 88 years old since the registration of transfer of ownership of each real estate of this case was completed; and (d) the deceased was in the state of lack of mental ability or judgment ability due to mental shock caused by the death of the dead child, the registration of transfer of ownership of each real estate of this case is deemed null and void because the Defendants

As to this, the Defendants donated each of the instant real estate to the Defendants around December 20, 2012 by the Deceased, but the grounds for registration are traded for the purpose of cutting off.

arrow