logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2014.12.30 2014가단1223
공탁금출급청구권확인 등
Text

1. As to KRW 22,213,33 deposited by this Court Nos. 1479 on September 9, 2013, Defendant B, and Defendant B.

Reasons

1. The owner of the land for AK AK 2,380 square meters remaining unregistered before the filing of a claim against the defendant Pyeong-gun for the transfer of the land was registered since June 22, 1959 in the owner's column for the forest register. The defendant Pyeong-gun deposited the compensation as stated in the order while accepting the said forest. The heir of the net AL is the plaintiff and the defendants, and the non-party, each of their inheritance shares are the same as the inheritance shares by the heir. The plaintiff paid the property tax imposed on the above land. On the other hand, the plaintiff did not file an application for correction of the certificate of deposit reflecting the above inheritance relation. The plaintiff can be acknowledged as having neglected the purport of pleading in each of the entries (including partial number of defense cards) in the certificate of evidence No. 1 through 10, 12 through 38 (including partial number). Thus, the plaintiff can seek confirmation against the defendant Pyeong-gun who deposited the above deposit against the plaintiff and the defendants, the plaintiff and the non-party (the co-inheritors et al.).

2. Claim against the remaining Defendants

(a) Claim for payment of the deposit money as indicated in the claim and notification of the transfer thereof;

(b) Under the applicable provisions of law (1) Defendant K/X: the remaining Defendants under Article 208(3)3 (a judgment by service by public notice) of the Civil Procedure Act: Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act (a judgment by public notice); Defendant D/E among them, expressed their intent to be present on the date of pleading and to recognize the Plaintiff’s claim on the date of pleading);

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.

arrow