beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 7, 1992, 192, the history of the D ground building in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “D land before the annexation”) D large 69.8 square meters (hereinafter “B before the annexation”).
(E) and E large 123.6m2 (hereinafter “E before annexation”)
(D) The D-Wedle 193.4m2 (hereinafter “D-Bed land”) following the annexation is combined.
(2) Around March 1975, 1975, the building was constructed on the D’s land prior to the annexation, 35.86 square meters of the mentor block ment and the sap sap sap string, and the building was removed on February 9, 200, and around June 1975, the building was constructed on the E’s land prior to the annexation 59.50 square meters on the 2nd floor and the 34.25 square meters of the 2nd floor and the 34.25 square meters of the 2nd floor (hereinafter “2nd building”) by reflecting the merger of the above land on March 8, 2005.
3) On May 10, 1996, C, the former spouse of C, completed the registration of ownership transfer on D land and buildings Nos. 1 and 2 after annexation, and thereafter, even if the first building was already removed as above, it is indicated that there are all buildings Nos. 1 and 2 on D land after annexation. 4) At present, there is a 135.22 square meters of 135.22 square meters of 2 stories of 2 stories of bricks and cement bricks sloping roof, and 119.63 square meters of 2 stories of 2 stories of 135.2 square meters of 2 stories of 2 stories of 19.63 square meters of 2 stories of 196 (hereinafter “the instant building”, however, there is no registration indicating the validity of the instant building as of 201). This is a single building constructed in a way that connects the existing building No. 1 and expands
B. On March 21, 1990, the Plaintiff and C continued to have a legal marital relationship with them on March 21, 1990, and they married again on October 5, 2002 on September 4, 2002, but the re-consultationd on March 9, 2004. (2) The Plaintiff entered into a re-consultation on December 30, 2003 with C on December 30, 2003 (Re-Marriage Period) 85,000,000, and the term of lease 2 years from December 30, 2003 to December 30, 2005.