(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.10.25 2015가단62226

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) 울산지방법원 2016.10.25 2015가단62226

소유권확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is unregistered land.

The Plaintiff’s Schedule

1. An annexed list under the premise that the area of real estate recorded is 278 square meters, but the annexed list;

1. The area of the registered real estate is 44 square meters;

B. B. The land cadastre of the instant real estate is indicated as being examined on June 5, 1912, and the address B is not indicated in B’s land cadastre. [The reasons for recognition are as follows: (a) the entry of evidence A No. 1, 2, 3, and 4; and (b) the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Benefits of confirmation;

(a) A claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State shall have interest in confirmation only in special circumstances, such as where the land is unregistered and its registrant is unknown in the land cadastre or forest land cadastre, or where it is unknown who the registrant is, or where the State denies the ownership of a third party who is the titleholder of the registration or the registration, and where the State continues to assert the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da48633 Decided October 15, 2009, etc.). B.

Since the address B of the registered titleholder is not indicated in the land cadastre of this case, it is difficult to identify who is the registered titleholder, the lawsuit of this case has interest in confirmation.

Considering the fact that the address of the owner and the location of the land are the same as the unit of Ri (Ri) as at the time of the preparation of the Land Survey Book at the time of the preparation of the Land Survey Book, the address of the owner and the location of the land are omitted, and the possibility of verifying the address of the registered titleholder B is considered, even in light of the fact that B appears to be dead, and that the heir and the address are difficult to easily understand, it can be deemed that the lawsuit against the State constitutes a case where the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown.

3. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. C. The C’s text is from B, who is, in order to use the instant real estate for the purpose of its use.

참조판례

-대법원 2009. 10. 15. 선고 2009다48633 판결

유사 판례

-대법원 2019.05.16 2018다242246

-대법원 2019. 5. 16. 선고 2018다242246 판결

-울산지방법원 2017.07.20 2017나20401

-대구지방법원 2020.05.14 2019나313822

-청주지방법원 2017.06.15 2016가단106469