logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.20 2019나76957
건물명도(인도)
Text

All appeals by the defendants are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The plaintiffs and the defendants' personal relations between the plaintiffs and the defendant 1) 1 are the lurgs of the networkJ, Ma K (mams), net M (mams), network N (mams), network M (mams), network P, network Q (mams), network R (mams), network R (mams), network Mms), network T(Ms) (i.e., more than 11), the plaintiff A is the lurgs of the network P, and the plaintiff C is the lurbU's wife of the network, and the plaintiff D and E are the children of each network BU.

Plaintiff

B is the father of women's networkO, and the plaintiff F is the father of women's net Q.

3) Defendant G is the children of G, and Defendant H is the wife of Defendant G. B. The ownership and possession relationship of the instant real estate 1) as to the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Seoul Central District Court completed the registration of initial ownership on August 11, 1997 as the receipt of No. 71516, supra.

2) On June 7, 2012, Defendant G filed a move-in report on the instant real estate owned by I, and currently occupied the instant real estate with Defendant H, the wife, along with the instant real estate. 3) On September 15, 2014, the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendants (hereinafter “the instant transfer of ownership”) was completed on the same day as the Seoul Central District Court received on the same day due to the donation on September 15, 2014.

4) However, in the Seoul Central District Court 2016Gahap51882, 2016Gahap537464 (Merger), where I filed against the Defendants, it is reasonable to deem that he completed the registration of ownership transfer of this case against the Defendants on the ground of donation due to the lack of I’s mental capacity. Accordingly, Defendant G was sentenced to the judgment that Defendant G was liable to implement the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer of this case with respect to the portion remaining 11/24 other than the portion of 1/24 shares out of the real estate of this case, excluding the portion of 1/24 shares in his share, and Defendant H was obligated to implement the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer of this case with respect to the portion of 1/2 shares out of the real estate of this case, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November

C. Inheritance of Plaintiffs and Defendant G.

arrow