logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원남원지원 2016.01.20 2015가단11015
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 7, 1981, part of the area B in the Jeonbuk-gun was designated as the route of Highway C (hereinafter “D”) and was incorporated into D road zones on December 2, 1981.

B. On February 17, 1982, E (the Defendant’s referring), F, and G completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the inheritance of the property on September 10, 1965, with respect to the land of H on February 17, 1982 (hereinafter “land before division”).

(E) 6/9, F Equity 2/9, G Equity 1/9). (c)

E on February 19, 1982, the transfer registration for F and G shares out of the land before subdivision was completed on February 15, 1982 due to sale and purchase as of February 15, 1982, and accordingly became the owner of the whole land before subdivision.

The land before subdivision was divided into the instant land and the I land (hereinafter referred to as “I land”) on June 16, 1983.

E. E received KRW 237,400, direct compensation for the land of this case from the Plaintiff around September 17, 1983, and KRW 158,860, indirect compensation for the land of this case around August 20, 1984.

F. D (the section from J to K in Yangyang-gun, Jeonyang-gun) was starting from June 27, 1984.

G. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on June 14, 2007 due to the donation from March 10, 1991, and thereafter paid the property tax on the instant real estate until now.

H. At present, D will not pass on the surface of the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6, 8, 9 (including virtual numbers), Eul's 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land for at least 20 years from June 27, 1984, for which the general public began to use D, and that the Plaintiff filed a claim for the registration of ownership transfer due to the completion of the statute of limitations for possession on June 26, 2004. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land for at least 20 years.

arrow