logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2012.10.18 2009가합12229
유류분반환등
Text

1. The plaintiff A:

A. Defendant C’s KRW 381,586,436 as well as 5% per annum from August 14, 2009 to October 18, 2012.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement Nos. 1 and 2 of the basic facts, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants as the children of F, who died on July 11, 2008 (hereinafter “the deceased”), are co-inheritors (each inheritance share 1/4), and Nonparty G is the wife of Defendant C, and Nonparty H is the child of Defendant C.

2. Judgment as to Plaintiff A’s primary claim

A. Plaintiff A, around the other hand, is the real estate listed in attached Form 1 (hereinafter “instant one real estate,” and as to the remaining real estate listed in attached Form 1, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant C is null and void in accordance with the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name because the deceased trusted in title to Defendant C, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant C with respect to the real estate of this case 2 through 18 real estate and deposits and cash listed in attached Form 2 (hereinafter “the instant case 1 through 12 deposits”) are the property donated to Defendant C or Defendant D in order of their numbers. The Plaintiff sought implementation of the ownership transfer registration procedure with respect to the real estate of this case 1/4 shares equivalent to the Plaintiff’s inheritance shares, and sought the return of each legal reserve against the Defendants with respect to the remaining real estate and cash.

B. According to the statement of evidence No. 3-18, it can be recognized that the registration of ownership transfer has been made from the deceased on November 19, 2005 with respect to the real estate of this case from the defendant C on the ground of donation on November 19, 2005. The content of evidence No. 6 that the deceased has received the land rent of this case from the deceased as the account of the deceased alone is insufficient to recognize that the deceased has held the title trust of the real estate of this case to the defendant C, unlike the above registration on the register, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

arrow