beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall make Jeju District Court with respect to the share of 1/4 of the area of 1,473 square meters and 1,472 square meters in Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopopo-si, and D.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 1, 2005, the Korea Asset Management Corporation filed a lawsuit against B on the claim for the payment of the transfer amount, and sentenced on June 1, 2005 to the Seoul Central District Court that “B shall pay to the Korea Asset Management Corporation the amount of KRW 1,73,586,123 and KRW 279,202,831 in proportion to the amount of KRW 19% per annum from January 1, 2005 to the date of full payment (2005Gahap18035).” The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 15, 2005.
B. After that, on September 18, 2012, the Korea Asset Management Corporation transferred the above credit to the Plaintiff and notified the transfer to B at that time.
C. Meanwhile, as to the shares of each real estate as stated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition No. 1, the Jeju District Court Seopopo District Court No. 23740 of Jun. 24, 1998, which was received as of June 23, 1998, completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer on the ground of trade reservation on June 23, 1998, and as at the date of the closing of the argument of this case, the right to claim ownership transfer was registered as of June 23,
【Fact-finding without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence 1 through 3, Gap’s evidence 4-1, 2, and Gap’s evidence 5 through 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the above recognition, since the defendant's right to conclude the purchase and sale reservation as to each real estate share stated in paragraph (1) of the order of the defendant expired after the lapse of the exclusion period of ten years from June 23, 1998 when the reservation was made, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of the provisional right to claim transfer of ownership, which has been completed in the name of the defendant with respect to each real estate share as above, and the plaintiff is entitled to exercise the right to claim the cancellation of the provisional right to claim transfer of ownership against the defendant
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted as reasonable.