logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.12.13 2016가단12631
부동산인도 등
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, the Defendant, C, D, E, F, and G are siblingss.

B. G died on October 9, 2009.

The heir has H(C) and children I and J.

C. On December 31, 1970, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in K, the mother of the original defendant on December 31, 1970, and on May 15, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 8, 2009 as follows:

Plaintiff (1/7), Defendant (1/7), C (1/7), D (1/7), E (1/7), F (1/7), H (3/49), I (2/49), J (2/49), and J (2/49)

D. On May 15, 2015, the registration of ownership preservation has been completed in the future, including the original Defendant on May 15, 2015, and the share ratio is different.

same as paragraph (1).

E. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 7, 2016 with respect to each share C among the respective real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

F. The Defendant exclusively occupies and uses each of the instant real estate.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) Even if a co-owner who owns shares in the land or a building or a person holding a right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership for his/her shares, such co-ownership cannot be exclusively occupied, used, and profit from the co-ownership without consultation with other co-owners. Thus, another co-owner may demand the delivery of the co-ownership as an act of preservation of the co-ownership, even if his/her shares fall short of the majority;

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 93Da9392, 9408 Decided March 22, 1994, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Da43324 Decided May 16, 2014, etc.) (b)

Examining the facts established under Paragraph (1) in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Plaintiff, a minority right holder of each of the instant real estate, is an act of preserving jointly owned property against the Defendant, who is another minority right holder that exclusively occupies and uses each of the instant real estate.

arrow