(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.30 2016가단5280735

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 2018.01.30 2016가단5280735

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, F, G, and H are the children of the network I (hereinafter “the deceased”), and Defendant B is the wife of the J, F’s children.

B. On May 22, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer was originally made under the name of the deceased, and on May 14, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer in the purport of the claim stated in the name of the Defendant B (hereinafter “instant registration of ownership transfer”) was completed on May 14, 2015. On the same day, the registration was completed on the same day by Defendant C as the mortgagee and Defendant B as the obligor, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed (hereinafter “registration of ownership creation in the instant case”).

C. On November 17, 2016, the Deceased died as KB.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the purchase and sale of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Deceased was in the state of no mental capacity due to dementia. The sale and purchase of the instant case in itself did not exist, or is null and void as a juristic act under the status of legal capacity.

Therefore, the registration of the transfer of ownership of this case and the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the ownership of this case based on the purchase of this case must be cancelled as the registration of the invalidity of the cause.

3. Determination

A. In a case where the registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to real estate 1 in the relevant legal doctrine, the nominal owner of the registration is presumed to have acquired ownership from a third party as well as from the former owner through legitimate grounds for registration. Therefore, the grounds for invalidation should be asserted and proved in the grounds for invalidation. If the current state of true right is disclosed, the registration of real estate is valid even if it is not reflected in the process or form that led to the disclosure. Thus, the nominal owner of the registration does not follow the grounds for registration entered in the register when he acquires real estate from the former owner.

유사 판례

-대법원 2015.08.27 2015다215823

-대전지방법원서산지원 2017.06.13 2016가단7656

-대전지방법원논산지원 2017.12.07 2017가단1403

-춘천지방법원 2019.10.15 2018가단52118

-인천지방법원 2019.08.30 2018가단249468