(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2016.11.24 2016가단3681

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) 광주지방법원목포지원 2016.11.24 2016가단3681

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The forest of this case was originally owned by D, and the fact that the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 17, 2008 due to the donation from November 7, 1990 is not disputed between the parties or recognized by the statement in Gap evidence No. 4.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion D donated the instant forest to E, the Defendant’s wife, around 1972, F purchased the instant forest from the instant forest, and around 1981, the instant land was owned by the Plaintiff, and the land was sold to G. The Defendant, which completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Act on Special Measures for Real Estate, on June 17, 2008, on the whole of the instant forest, including the instant land, agreed to transfer the instant land to the Plaintiff in installments between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on June 3, 2009, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the instant land by agreement with the Plaintiff on June 3, 2009.

B. 1) Determination 1 is insufficient to recognize the agreement on June 3, 2009 only with the statement of Gap evidence No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. 2) In addition, in order to establish a contract, the agreement between the parties is required to be reached, and such agreement is not necessary with respect to all matters constituting the content of the contract in question, but there is a specific agreement with or at least an agreement on standards, method, etc. that may specify the essential or important matters in the future.

In case where the parties concerned fail to reach an agreement on the matters that the agreement should be reached, it is reasonable to regard the contract as not being concluded, unless there are special circumstances.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da51650, Mar. 23, 2001). However, the Plaintiff occupies the instant land at present.

참조판례

-대법원 2001. 3. 23. 선고 2000다51650 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2019.04.26 2018나2413

-청주지방법원 2019.07.18 2018나2111

-서울남부지방법원 2019.06.27 2018가단213037

-대구지방법원 2020.06.10 2019나4975

-인천지방법원 2018.01.24 2017가단208460