logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.24 2015가단125569
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the registration of transfer of ownership as stated in the purport of the claim by the Defendant Aison Partnership Co., Ltd. as to the share of 29 percent (hereinafter “instant land”) out of the 23m29m2 in Daegu Northern-gu B river, Daegu-gu, the Plaintiff did not have a sales contract, which is a cause of the act, or the sales contract is null and void as an unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act.

Even if the sales contract is based on defective legal acts under Articles 109 through 110 of the Civil Act, it shall be revoked by the service of the duplicate of the complaint of this case.

Therefore, the defendant ABL partnership's transfer of ownership and the transfer of ownership in the purport of the claim for the defendant IBB trust should be cancelled as the registration of invalidity of cause.

2. Determination

A. It is presumed that the registration of transfer of ownership as stated in the purport of the claim by Defendant ABD is completed lawfully with respect to the assertion that there was no act of cause or there was no agreement on the content of the contract.

In the presence of the plaintiff, there was no act of causing the plaintiff due to such reasons as the contract No. 3 was not prepared.

Although the plaintiff alleged that there was no agreement on the terms of a sales contract between the plaintiff and the above defendant company, as long as the plaintiff agreed or consented to the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the subject matter of sale, the sales contract cannot be deemed null and void on the ground that the sales contract was not prepared in front. Therefore, this argument by the plaintiff cannot

B. As to the assertion of the conclusion of a sales contract by unfair juristic act, there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract by the Plaintiff and Defendant ABD partnership in relation to the conclusion of the sales contract by the instant land under the circumstances where the Plaintiff significantly lost fairness due to poverty, rash, or inexperience.

arrow