(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.23 2015재나400

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.23 2015재나400

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent in records or significant to this court:

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the implementation of the principal registration procedure based on the provisional registration completed on January 16, 2001 by Gangnam-gu District Court No. 2819, Gangnam-gu, Seoul Central District Court, which received on January 16, 2001, as Seoul Central District Court 2004da152894.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the above provisional registration, which was completed in the name of the plaintiff, did not exist or even if there exists no act of causing the provisional registration, constitutes a false declaration of conspiracy, and that the above provisional registration was completed due to coercion of the plaintiff and the plaintiff's spouse.

However, the above court rendered a judgment citing the plaintiff's claim on February 16, 2005.

B. The defendant appealed with the Seoul Central District Court 2005Na7206.

The above court changed the judgment of the first instance on September 8, 2005 on the ground that the Plaintiff changed the date of the completion of the purchase and sale reservation, and sentenced the Plaintiff to the judgment that “The Defendant shall implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on the ground of the provisional registration completed on January 16, 2001 by the Seoul Central District Court Gangnam District Court’s receipt No. 2819 on the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”).

C. The Defendant re-appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2005Da61133, but the Defendant’s final appeal was dismissed on January 13, 2006, and the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion (1) The Plaintiff did not pay the purchase price pursuant to the real estate purchase and sale reservation to the Defendant, and the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of the content of cancellation of the real estate purchase and sale reservation three times from December 12, 2003 to August 24, 2004.

The content certification that the defendant submits to Eul evidence 2 is a new support for the defendant's argument.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.07 2015재나295

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.21 2018재나234

-대법원 2002. 7. 9. 선고 2001다43922, 43939 판결

-수원지방법원안산지원 2015.01.15 2014가합2423

-서울중앙지방법원 2007.10.18 2007재나115