logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
춘천지방법원원주지원 2014.01.29 2013가단3032
소유권이전등기
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. As to each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”), E was listed as the first assessment title in the land cadastre prepared in 1915, which was the Japanese occupation point of Japanese occupation, and thereafter the transfer of ownership was completed in the name of father F of E.

F on October 11, 1943, the F completed the transfer of ownership to ASEAN, and G completed the transfer of ownership on February 7, 1949 to Ha who was an siblings.

B. After that, the registry of the instant land was destroyed due to the Korean War, G died at that time, and G was solely inherited as the successor to the head of the Plaintiff.

H died on June 22, 1972.

C. Although the registration of recovery has not been completed, Defendant B completed the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of H on May 9, 1973 (hereinafter “registration of preservation of ownership”). On the same day, the Plaintiff and the Defendants completed the registration of transfer of ownership in co-ownership on April 14, 1973 with respect to each of 1/4 shares (hereinafter “registration of transfer of ownership”).

Attached Form

On June 22, 2011 with respect to Defendant B’s 1/4 portion among each land listed in the list 6 through 9, the compulsory auction procedure was commenced on June 22, 201, and Song Ho-ho was awarded a successful bid and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 16, 2012.

E. The plaintiff is the member of the Imar clan (hereinafter "the clan of this case"). The defendant D is the plaintiff's relative as the member of G, and the defendant C is the member of the clan of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 through 9, Gap evidence 2-1 through 9, Gap evidence 3 and 4, Gap evidence 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the Plaintiff’s ownership of G, and G, in order to not be subject to commercial confiscation during the land reform period, G held title trust with H who is a punishment and completed the registration of ownership transfer. Such title trust agreement is null and void in accordance with the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name.