logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.04.12 2014가단43290
소유권이전등기말소 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 16, 1932, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of Non-Party 5 on the non-party 1’s non-party 1’s non-party 4 forest land located in Jeonju-gun-gun-gun-gun-gun-gun-gun, the land before the division, on February 13, 1934.

B. After that, the land before the said subdivision was divided into the Y, Z, AA, and AB due to the development completion, etc., and the said land was subdivided from the former Y, Z, AA, and AB.

C. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 30, 1992 on the 4th Z, Z, YY-si, Jeonju-si, with respect to the registration of ownership preservation under the above V name and the registration of ownership transfer under the above W, and on February 13, 1992, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 5, 1958 due to the inheritance of Australia, and the defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 30, 1992 under his name on March 30, 1992.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 5 (if available, including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. The former-gun U Forest, which is the land prior to the completion of the Plaintiff’s prescription for the acquisition of possession of the instant land, was the land under the name of Nonparty Doe-gun, the head of the deceased AD, and the said AE donated the said land to Nonparty Doe-gun, the head of the deceased Doe-gun, who was supporting himself in around 1920. The said AE donated the said land to Nonparty Doe-gun, the son, who was occupying the instant land divided from the said land as farmland or grave base, and after the said AD died, the said AF and the Plaintiff, the son’s children, were cultivated together. After the death of the said AF on October 16, 201, the said AF continued to possess the said land with the Plaintiff’s intent to own.

As above, Nonparty AD, AF, and Plaintiff’s land in this case in turn.

arrow