logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.01.30 2018나2016117
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court cited the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case are as follows, and the defendant emphasizes or added part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows and the decision on the argument that the defendant emphasizes or added in this court is added to the following Paragraph 2, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The 3rd, 15, 20, 4, 8, 5, 7, 6, 16, 19, 8, 9, 3, 7, 4, 5, 7, and 8, each “Plaintiff” of the 10th, 11th, 5, 7, and 8 shall be described as “B” respectively.

The following shall be added to the last place of conduct:

“4) On January 6, 2014, the executor of the deceased’s will was changed from L to B, and as B withdraws from the executor and custodian, the Seoul Family Court appointed the Plaintiff, an attorney-at-law on August 21, 2018, as the executor of the deceased’s will (2018Ra5436), and on October 15, 2018, the Plaintiff appointed the Plaintiff as an administrator of North Korean’s children residing in North Korea.

(2018 Mono 5324). The sixth 20th "Evidences" added to the following "the purport of the entire pleadings":

After the 7th page “I am........., in this court, the Defendant did not properly explain the acquisition procedure of Chinese nationality, and failed to submit objective data related thereto, and the Defendant’s reasons for not entering the Republic of Korea are difficult to obtain a hot spring.”

The 10th sentence "this Court" is referred to as the "court of the first instance".

The defendant, who asserts that "the defendant was a North Korean, but he did not become a North Korean by acquiring the Chinese nationality before the completion of each registration of ownership transfer of this case," in the first 11th, has the burden of proof, and the defendant does not specifically prove that he acquired the Chinese nationality without due process.

arrow