logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.07.23 2019나51380 (1)
소유권이전등기말소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the part indicated as “N” in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as “O”; and (b) the “No. 15” in the fourth 2 line of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as “No. 23”; and (c) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition or supplement of the judgment in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Determination on addition or supplement

A. Relevant legal doctrine 1) Special Measures for the Transfer, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (hereinafter “Special Measures Act”)

(2) In order to reverse such presumption, a registration is presumed to have been duly made in accordance with the procedures prescribed in the Act and is consistent with the substantive legal relationship. Thus, in order to reverse such presumption, a letter of guarantee or confirmation under the Act on Special Measures, which forms the basis of such registration, has been forged or falsely prepared, or for any other reason, the registration is not lawful in accordance with the Act on Special Measures (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 89Meu24797, May 25, 1990). 2) In light of the fact that the Act on Special Measures permits a registration that is inconsistent with the process of changing a right against the actual transferee of real estate, the date of purchase, which is later than the date of the death of the original owner or the previous registrant, or that the name or date of purchase on the letter of guarantee or confirmation, which is different from the real owner, or that the registration is not presumed to be lawful only if only the specific reason for the change of rights is omitted and only the current status of the right is stated therein.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da33775, Oct. 27, 2000). A person who completed registration under the Act on Special Measures for Residents is indicated in a letter of guarantee or written confirmation.

arrow