beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment of this court in paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
On the third side of the judgment of the court of first instance, each "the appraiser of this court" shall be dismissed as "the appraiser of the court of first instance" in both 4 and 5 below.
Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance is 8, "no" shall be deemed "no".
Under Article 5 of the judgment of the first instance, the "Witness M and Witness N" of the 7th following acts shall be deemed "M and N" of the first instance court.
In the sixth judgment of the first instance, the following matters shall be added between five and six:
“Real estate registration is presumed to exist formally in itself as a legitimate ground for registration, and a person asserting that a person who has registered the title in trust with another person shall be liable to prove title trust (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Da84479, Oct. 29, 2015; 2017Da26051, Dec. 22, 2017). In addition, where a parent, before his/her birth, hands over his/her own property to a group of children, his/her parents still exercise the right to manage and dispose of the relevant property under a self-reliance cooperation or consent after his/her birth, it is common sense that his/her parents still exercise the right to manage and dispose of the relevant property even after his/her own name was transferred, it cannot be readily concluded as title trust, not donation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da2859, Dec. 23, 2010).
"A copy of a conversation (Evidence A, No. 7, 11, 24, 26, 46, 49) between the deceased and the wife A (one day AF) of the Plaintiff at around 2013 or around 2014, the deceased purchased the said real estate with its own property."