(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.17 2019가단5097415

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.17 2019가단5097415

소유권말소등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 11, 1997, on the instant real estate, the ownership transfer registration was completed under the name of Defendant C, No. 21243 on April 11, 1997, and the ownership transfer registration was completed under the name of Defendant B on June 13, 2001.

B. As to the instant real estate, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the registration of transfer of ownership under Defendant B’s name against the Plaintiff on the ground that the registration of transfer of ownership under the name of the Seoul Central District Court 2017Kadan95038 was based on the title trust, and that the registration of transfer of ownership was null and void due to the violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, but the said court rendered a decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on June 15, 2018, and the appellate court dismissed the appeal on March 20, 2019. The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time

(Seoul Central District Court 2018Na41558). [Reasons for Recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether it conflicts with the res judicata effect;

A. The right to claim for ownership transfer registration and the right to claim for cancellation of the registration of invalidation, which are allowed in lieu of the registration of cancellation of the relevant legal doctrine, are to restore the name of the true owner, and its purpose is substantially identical, and both claims are identical in its legal basis and nature. Thus, even if the former takes the form of the registration of cancellation, the subject matter of a lawsuit should be deemed the same in substance. Therefore, if the judgment against the claim for ownership transfer registration based on the registration of cancellation was rendered in a lawsuit claiming ownership transfer based on the registration of cancellation, the res judicata effect shall also extend to the subsequent lawsuit claiming cancellation of ownership transfer registration (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 9Da37894, Sept. 20, 201). The subject matter of a lawsuit claiming for cancellation registration is the subject matter of the pertinent registration.

참조판례

-대법원 2001. 9. 20. 선고 99다37894 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.06.27 2018나74761

-수원지방법원성남지원 2019.12.05 2018가단235100

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.09.22 2019나32887

-부산지방법원 2017.04.07 2016나51870

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.11.10 2016가단16392