logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.06.26 2013가단34211
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On July 19, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against D against D to file a claim for cancellation of ownership registration with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Ga225325, which included that “D shall carry out the procedure for cancellation of registration of cancellation of ownership registration completed on January 22, 1981 as the receipt No. 484, the registration of cancellation of ownership registration with respect to the land of this case on November 20, 201.” The fact that the Defendant completed registration of preservation of ownership on the land of this case on November 20, 2012 is either not disputed between the parties, or may be recognized by taking into account the entire purport of pleadings in the statement No. 3 and No. 1.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s father purchased the instant land at around 1963, and occupied and used the instant land by installing a vinyl house and bean, etc., with the Plaintiff’s intent to own, in a peaceful and public performance manner. As such, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s father acquired the instant land by prescription on January 1, 1984, at least 20 years after the first purchase, and sought implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration against the Defendant on the ground of completion of the prescription period for possession acquisition.

In regard to this, the Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff’s possession is merely the possession of a third party in light of the unclear circumstances about the acquisition of the instant land.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the statements and images of evidence Nos. 1-2 through 4, evidence Nos. 1-2 and 2-1 through 6, witness E’s testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings in this court’s on-site inspection, the Plaintiff’s father cultivated with the Plaintiff in the land of this case from 1963 to 1963, and the Plaintiff’s father was living together with the Plaintiff, and after the Plaintiff’s father’s death, he has been farming in the land of this case, and currently, he installs a vinyl house, etc., and cultivates, bean, e.g., and

arrow