logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.06.05 2014가단19509
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. F, who is the assistant supervisor of the plaintiffs, was 1914 (Seoul 3 years)

3. On October 19, 2003, the Yangju-gun G (the name of the administrative district was changed to H at Yangju-si on October 19, 2003; hereinafter the same shall apply) was under the circumstances of 1,2,5 square meters in 1,2,5 forest land (hereinafter “land before division”).

B. On January 6, 1983, Defendant D completed the registration of ownership preservation on the land before subdivision in accordance with the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership Ownership (Act No. 3562 of Apr. 3, 1982, invalidation, and invalidation (hereinafter “Special Measures Act”).

C. Since January 24, 191, the land before subdivision was divided into each real estate listed in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the attached Table Nos. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”), Yangju-gun J-gun J-gun 1,464 square meters, and 212 square meters of K forest land.

Defendant E completed the registration of ownership transfer on the land of this case on January 17, 2008 due to donation.

E. Meanwhile, F died on or around December 30, 1940 and solely inherited F’s property. L was deceased on or around November 15, 1969 and jointly inherited the Plaintiffs and M’ property as shown in the attached shares ratio table.

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

2. Since the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of Defendant D with respect to the land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case was made based on a false letter of guarantee or confirmation, registration of invalidity of cause is made, and registration of transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant E with respect to the land No. 2 of this case based thereon is invalid. Thus, Defendant D is liable for the plaintiffs to implement the procedures for transfer of ownership, etc. due to the restoration of real name with respect to the corresponding shares of the plaintiffs in the separate sheet of shares in the land No. 1 of this case.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) Registration completed in accordance with the Act on Special Measures shall be substantive.

arrow