(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2014.12.03 2014가단2358

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) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2014.12.03 2014가단2358

소유권말소등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In Bocheon-si, C forest land 1,488 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) was owned by the network D. However, the registration of ownership transfer was completed to the Defendant under the received Act No. 20489 on October 13, 1993, based on the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 4502, hereinafter “Special Measures”).

B. The deceased died on April 10, 1979, and the plaintiff is one of the inheritors as the children of the deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The registration completed under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership Transfer of Real Estate to Judgment on the Grounds for the Claims is completed in accordance with the lawful procedures prescribed by the Act, and it is presumed that the registration completed under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership is acceptable. Thus, a person who seeks to cancel the ownership transfer registration completed under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration, etc.

For other reasons, it is necessary to assert and prove that the registration of transfer was not lawfully made due to other reasons, and further, a false letter of guarantee or confirmation means that the substantive contents of the changes in rights do not fit the truth.

Witness

In full view of the purport of the argument in E’s testimony, the letter of guarantee (Evidence No. 3) that forms the basis for the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant under the Act on Special Measures for the Land of this case does not directly affix the seal of E as the guarantor, but it is recognized that F arbitrarily affixs it without the consent of E. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the above letter of guarantee was forged, and since the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant with respect to the land of this case, which is based on the forged letter of guarantee, has broken the presumption of the registration. Thus, special circumstances

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015.07.21 2014나108650

-수원지방법원 2016.01.22 2015나8008

-대구지방법원 영덕지원 2018.04.10 2017가단1559

-대구지방법원 영덕지원 2018.07.03 2017가단1573

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2016.04.19 2015가단9707