logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.15 2018나81266
소유권보존등기말소 청구
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except where the court of the first instance renders five and eight pages or less of the judgment of the court of the first instance as follows. Thus, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

4) The following circumstances acknowledged by Gap's evidence Nos. 9, 13 (including paper numbers), Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 through 10, 12 through 15 were currently transferred to the "State" on January 25, 1932, and Gap's land was transferred to the "State" and AM was deemed to have been used as a road from around 193 to September 7, 193 after completion of the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the "State Road", and the land No. 1, 2, 3, 5 through 10, and 12 through 15 was changed to the category of the road No. 1, 3, 194, and the land category No. A, 1, 3, 4, 1, 196, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 57, 1, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 1, 6, 1, 7.

arrow