logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 경주지원 2018.04.10 2017가단981
소유권확인
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. The summary and racing market of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) was implemented with respect to the land of the racing-dong, Gyeong-si, including each land listed in the separate sheet from 1978 to 1980 (hereinafter “each land of this case”).

The father D, who is the father of the plaintiffs, paid the purchase cost of the land for the excessive sale area of each land of this case or paid the property tax.

Nevertheless, the racing market registered each land of this case as owned by a third party, not D.

D As a result of the death of May 3, 201, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties inherited D, each of the instant land is owned by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties.

2. Determination

A. The benefit of confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation is acknowledged in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to it, and thereby, it is deemed as the most effective and appropriate means to determine the Plaintiff’s legal status as a confirmation judgment to eliminate the anxiety risk (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da93299, Feb. 25, 2010). Moreover, a claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State against the land ownership is unregistered and its land is not registered, and it is impossible to identify the registrant or the title holder in the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, and there is a benefit of confirmation only in cases where the State continues to assert state ownership while denying the ownership of a third party, who is the title holder of registration

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da48633 Decided October 15, 2009, etc.). However, in full view of the respective descriptions in subparagraphs 1, 2, and 7-1, and 2 of the evidence Nos. 2 and 6-2 of the evidence Nos. 1, 7-1, and 2 of the evidence Nos. 2 and 6-2, each of the instant lands is the land for which the transfer registration of shares was completed on February 17, 1981 in E, 2260/2632 shares, and F, 372/2632 shares in the above registered titleholders, and the State does not assert that they are owned by the State while denying the ownership of the above registered titleholder.

arrow