logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.07.12 2018나61429
소유권이전등기
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. Basic facts

A. The real estate listed in attached Forms 1 through 4, which was owned by C, had completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the defendant under the receipt of No. 8642 on June 16, 2010 due to a sales contract as of June 14, 2010, and the registration of ownership transfer was also completed on the same day, 35,000,000 won with the maximum debt amount, and the establishment of a neighboring mortgage E-association.

B. The real estate listed in the Attachment No. 5, which was owned by B, was completed on June 3, 201 as the receipt of No. 7453 on the ground of the sale contract on May 27, 2011, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Each real estate listed in the Plaintiff’s attached Forms 1 through 5 is a real estate jointly purchased by F in a de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff and title trust in the name of the Defendant, who is a F’s father. Since a title trust agreement is null and void, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedures for ownership transfer registration or ownership cancellation registration to C and B, who is the former owner.

B. A purchaser of each real estate listed in [Attachment 1 to 5] is not the Plaintiff and F, but the Defendant.

Even if the registration title trust agreement between the third party on each of the above real estate is recognized, the title truster is not the plaintiff and the F.1 person.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant should be dismissed.

3. The court's explanation on this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the alteration of part of the reasoning of the judgment as follows. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The actual purchaser of each real estate listed in Forms 1 through 19, which added “A evidence 32” in Part 4, shall be the Plaintiff and F, and they may confirm that the above real estate was trusted in trust to the Defendant,” and then the testimony of F of the appellate court witness against this.

arrow