(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.07 2012가단52589

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) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.07 2012가단52589

지분소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiffs' primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. G maintained the following order between Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C, Defendant C, and Defendant C, Defendant C, and Defendant C, Defendant C, and Defendant C, the wife of which was South and North Korea.

B. On September 5, 1971, G completed registration of preservation of ownership of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant forest”) and owned the said real estate, G moved to the United States where E and his/her wife were living, and died on August 8, 2002.

C. While inheritance registration has not been made with respect to the forest land of this case, the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter "registration of ownership transfer of this case") in its name pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Real Estate Ownership (Act No. 7500, Feb. 15, 1993) under the name of the guarantor (hereinafter "the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate") by submitting a letter of guarantee issued by H, I, and J (the purport that the defendant guarantees that he/she currently owns the forest of this case by donation from G on February 15, 1993) and a written confirmation issued by the head of the budget Gun with respect to the forest of this case.

E died on August 7, 2013 while the instant lawsuit was pending, and on December 3, 2013, the Plaintiffs taken over the legal proceedings as the heir of the deceased E.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, fact inquiry results about the budget head of this court, and records clearly

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' primary claims

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion was around February 15, 1993 that the defendant received a donation as to the forest of this case (hereinafter "the deceased") residing in the United States, and since there was no donation to the defendant of the forest of this case, the registration of transfer of ownership in this case is invalid.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' share of inheritance in respect of the deceased's inherited property and the deceased's share of inheritance in network E.

참조조문

-부동산등기 특별조치법

유사 판례

-전주지방법원남원지원 2015.07.15 2014가단3314

-대구지방법원 2017.10.25 2017나304282

-대구지방법원안동지원 2016.01.27 2015가단3235

-창원지방법원통영지원 2016.03.17 2014가단15865

-대구지방법원 2019.02.21 2017가단28884