209da65771 Registration of transfer of ownership

Ma-○ (60-years, South)

Essung simuls

b)

Incheon

October 19, 2010

November 23, 2010

1. The plaintiff's claim (the appointed party) is all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (the appointed party).

원고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 원고 선정자들에게 , 피고 선정자 ○좌○은 13 , 469 , 618원 , 피고 선 정자 원○○는 28 , 523 , 899원 , 피고 선정자 ⑨는 4 , 753 , 983원 , 피고 선정자 ○민이 는 4 , 753 , 983원 , 피고 ( 선정당사자 ) ①희는 19 , 015 , 932원 , 피고 선정자 ☆☆희는 19 , 015 , 932원 , 피고 선정자 ♤♤희는 4 , 753 , 983원 및 위 각 돈에 대하여 이 사건 소장 부본 송달 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20 % 의 비율에 의한 돈을 벌지 원고 ( 선정당 사자 ) 및 선정자들 상속지분 기재 각 상속지분 비율에 따라 지급하라 .

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

가 . 망 정그□은 1968 . 5 . 30 . 경 원●●로부터 화성시 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 부동산 ' 이라 한 다 ) 을 매수하고 , 그 무렵부터 이 사건 부동산을 인도받아 점유 · 사용하다가 1994 . 3 . 29 . 사망하였다 . 원고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 원고 선정자들은 정♡♡의 상속인들인데 그 중 원고 ( 선정당사자 ) 은성이 계속하여 이 사건 부동산을 점유 · 사용하였다 . 따라서 , 원 고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 원고 선정자들은 이 사건 부동산을 20년 이상 소유의 의사로 평온 , 공연하게 점유함으로써 이를 시효취득하였고 , 또한 위와 같이 정♡♡이 이 사건 부동 산을 준오로부터 매수한 바 있으므로 , 춘의 상속인들인 피고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 피 고 선정자들은 원고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 원고 선정자들에게 , 주위적으로는 위 점유취득시효 완성으로 인한 , 예비적으로는 위 매매에 기한 소유권이전등기절차를 이행할 의무가 있 다 .

B. However, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, while acquiring through consultation or accepting the instant real estate, paid each compensation described in the purport of the claim to the Defendant (designated parties) and the Defendant’s designated parties, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in relation to each of the instant real estate from the Defendant (designated parties) and the Defendant’s designated parties.

C. Accordingly, the duty of the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Defendant’s designated parties to transfer ownership registration to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Plaintiff’s designated parties to the registration of transfer of ownership was impossible due to the above acquisition and expropriation. Thus, the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Defendant’s designated parties were paid as the exercise of the right to claim the subject matter.

each compensation shall be paid.

2. Determination

(a) The primary cause of the claim (the claim for the acquisition by prescription of possession);

In order to exercise the right to claim for registration based on the expiration of the period of acquisition of real estate ownership due to possession becomes impossible, the right to claim for registration shall have been claimed on the ground that the period of acquisition of real estate ownership due to possession has expired on the behalf of the titleholder of the registration before the impossibility of performance, or that the right to claim for registration based on the expiration of the period of acquisition should have been exercised. If the right is not asserted or exercised prior to the impossibility of performance, the right to claim for registration shall not be exercised (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da43825 delivered on December 10, 196).

In addition, the reasons for deeming as above are that, inasmuch as the owner of the real estate, the prescriptive acquisition of which was completed, knew or could have known that it would constitute a tort if he disposed of such real estate after having known or could have known of the acquisition by the prescriptive acquisition of another person (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da60779, Apr. 12, 1994), allowing the exercise of the right to claim a registration only in cases where the performance of the right to claim a registration is impossible under the circumstances similar thereto, is in accord with the concept of adjustment and equity between the owner and the purchaser of the right to claim a registration. Therefore, in order to exercise the right to claim a registration, the registration titleholder should have known or could have known the fact of the prescriptive acquisition by claiming the right or exercising the right to claim a registration before the impossibility of the performance of the right to claim a registration.

그런데 , 이 사건에서 보건대 , 원고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 원고 선정자들은 2009 . 8 . 13 . 망 ◇주를 상대로 이 사건 소를 제기하였다가 , 소장 부본 송달을 위한 주소보정 과정에 서 준의 사망사실을 알고 2010 . 2 . 24 . 피고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 피고 선정자들로 당사 자표시를 정정하였고 , 그에 따라 2010 . 3 . 5 . 부터 2010 . 3 . 9 . 사이에 이 사건 소장 부 본이 피고 ( 선정당사자 ) 및 피고 선정자들에게 각 송달된 사실은 기록상 명백하고 , 한편

According to the evidence No. 10, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation’s acquisition by agreement or expropriation of the instant real estate by agreement can be acknowledged as between October 1, 2009 and December 22, 2009. In light of this, only the fact that the instant lawsuit was filed, and the right to claim for registration of the instant real estate cannot be fulfilled.

Before becoming a party to the lawsuit, the plaintiff (designated party) and the designated party cannot be deemed to have claimed a right against the registered titleholder or exercised a right to make a registration based on the expiration of the acquisition period, and no other evidence exists to prove that the plaintiff (designated party) asserted a right before the lawsuit in this case was filed, or that the plaintiff (designated party) exercised a right to claim a registration based on the expiration of the registration period.

The fact that the right of subscription has been exercised is that there is no fact.

Therefore, this part of the claim by the plaintiff (designated party) is without merit.

(b) Preliminary cause of claim (purchase claim);

갑 제4 , 7호증 ( 가지번호 포함 ) 및 증인 이○권 , ①①환의 각 증언만으로는 , 망 정♡ ①이 1968 . 5 . 30 . 경 준로부터 이 사건 부동산을 매수하였다고 인정하기에 부족하 고 , 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없다 .

Therefore, this part of the claim by the plaintiff (designated party) is without merit.

3. Conclusion

All of the claims of the plaintiff (designated parties) are dismissed.

Judges Lee Chang-chul