logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.04.30 2014나40234
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 30, 2006, C, the husband of the Defendant, jointly and severally guaranteed KRW 45,00,000,000 for the loans owed to the Plaintiff by D.

B. On October 14, 2005, C entered into a lease agreement and resided in the apartment in the above apartment, setting the lease term of KRW 46,200,000 as the lease deposit amount for the apartment of this case between Maridong Co., Ltd. and Maridong Co., Ltd. on October 14, 2005.

C. On December 1, 2008, the Defendant entered into a conversion contract for sale in lots with 89,500,000 won for the apartment of this case, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 16th of the same month. Of the sale price, 41,701,710 won out of the above sale price was replaced by the refund bond issued by C with the lease deposit claim held by Da with riridong Co., Ltd., and 26,00,000 won out of the remainder of the sale price was paid from the National Housing Fund, and 21,798,290 won was loaned from the Bank of Korea.

On December 4, 2008, the Defendant transferred KRW 2,528,300 to the account of a certified judicial scrivener F, who accepted the above registration case from his account, in total, the expenses for the registration of ownership transfer and the expenses for the registration of mortgage establishment in the name of Korean bank.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-3, 4, Eul evidence 1 through 3, 5, Eul evidence 6-1, 2, Eul evidence 8, testimony of the witness of the court of first instance and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The judgment on the primary claim of the Plaintiff is 1) The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion concluded a contract to lend the name of the Defendant, who is his spouse, to convert the ownership into the instant apartment, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant. As C’s creditor, the Plaintiff, by subrogationing C, terminated a title trust agreement on the instant apartment, and seek for the Defendant to implement the procedure for registration of ownership transfer based on the cancellation of title trust regarding the instant apartment. 2)

arrow