logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원영동지원 2013.08.23 2011가단244
소유권말소등기
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11, and Eul evidence No. 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), unless there is a dispute between the parties, or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings.

On August 30, 1914, the Z was assessed on each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) in the order stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) in the specific case.

B. On March 11, 1919, the Z died and succeeded to the Z’s property to the Australia. On January 9, 1943, AB succeeded to the property of AB, and AB died on November 6, 1981, and jointly succeeded to the property of the Plaintiffs and AC, AD, AE, and AF, who are children of AB.

C. On the other hand, each registration of preservation of ownership of each of the instant real estate was completed as indicated in the following table:

(A) Each of the above registrations of initial ownership (hereinafter referred to as "each of the above registrations of initial ownership") No. 562 of the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer, etc. of Ownership in Forest and Forest Areas (Act No. 211 of Jun. 23, 1981), No. 12410 of the same Act, No. 12410 of the same Act, No. 9569 of May 19, 1981, No. 9569 of the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer, etc. of Ownership in V Real Estate (Act No. 3094 of May 19, 1981), No. 1240 of the same Act, No. 7562 of the same Act, No. 1240 of Jun. 23, 1981, No. 19657, May 16, 1986 of the same Act, No. 1981, May 196, 1981.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that each of the real estate in this case is an individual's property under the circumstances of the Z, which is the part of the plaintiffs' expansion, and is not the property of the AI species-friendly council with no substance, and each of the real estate in this case is the basis of each registration of preservation of ownership

arrow