logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2017.10.13 2016가합100923
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation in the litigation is the intervenor joining the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On February 18, 2002, the Plaintiff purchased G buildings with the size of 4, 8, and 8 above ground level from Dapo-si E, F, and Mapo-si (hereinafter “G buildings”) from Dopo-si, Mapo-si, Mapo-si, and was awarded a favorable judgment by filing a lawsuit against D seeking ownership transfer registration.

Nevertheless, D completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on each of the instant real estate among G buildings, and as such, D completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant through the court’s conciliation procedure despite the obligation of the Plaintiff to perform the registration of ownership transfer on each of the instant real estate, constitutes a juristic act contrary to social order or a false declaration of conspiracy that prevents the Plaintiff from exercising the right to claim ownership transfer registration.

Therefore, the registration of each transfer of ownership, which is completed in the future of the defendant, is null and void due to a juristic act against social order or a false conspiracy. Thus, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership, which is completed with respect to each of

2. Determination

A. Where a person who has the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer or the right to claim the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer against the owner of real estate adjusts between the third party and the owner of the real estate without completing the registration, to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the real estate, and where the registration of ownership transfer has been completed in the name of the third party in accordance with the mediation protocol, if the former owner of the right to claim the registration has the right to claim the cancellation on the ground that the above registration of ownership transfer in the name of the third party in subrogation of the former owner in order to preserve it unless the mediation protocol is null and void automatically or the quasi-deliberation procedure is revoked, it is not

Supreme Court Decision 200Hun-Ga6 delivered on July 6, 2000

arrow