(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.06.18 2018나213751

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) 의정부지방법원 2019.06.18 2018나213751

소유권보존등기등말소

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The plaintiffs' total costs of litigation.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition are the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the relevant part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) In the absence of counter-proofs such as the change of the circumstances by an adjudication, the person registered in the Land Survey Book as the owner of the land shall be presumed to have received the assessment as the owner of the land and presumed to have become final and conclusive. The presumption of registration of preservation of ownership is broken if it is found that a person other than the title holder of the preservation registration was under the assessment of the relevant land

(2) On May 23, 1997, in light of the following circumstances, i.e., the title holder and the Plaintiff’s increased portion of the evidence are identical to T, i.e., the fact holder’s domicile and the permanent domicile of T are the same as Hri (the change of the administrative district to Aririth, 1914, 1914, 1914, 200), and the situation owner’s land was not submitted to H in addition to the Plaintiff’s prior domicile, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s prior domicile and I, the same person, as the Plaintiff’s prior owner, acquired the ownership of the land of this case, since it is reasonable to deem that T and I, the Plaintiff’s prior domicile and the permanent domicile of T were the same as the original owner of the land of this case.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the registration of preservation of this case in the name of the defendant as to the land of this case is null and void. Thus, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of preservation registration of this case to the plaintiffs who seek cancellation of preservation registration of this case as an act of preservation of jointly owned property by acquiring ownership of this case in succession.

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion (1) The Defendant’s assertion regarding the instant land.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 1997. 5. 23. 선고 95다46654,46661 판결

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.10.25 2018가단76954

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.16 2017가단5222200

-의정부지방법원 2015.11.27 2015가단102200

-대법원 2008. 12. 24. 선고 2007다79718 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.27 2015가단5387790