logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.05.29 2018가단202094
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On December 15, 2009, registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name C with respect to the real estate indicated on the basis of the facts attached thereto (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and on September 22, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Defendant on the grounds of sale.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 9, purport of whole pleadings]

2. 원고의 주장요지 원고는 ㈜샤프건설과 이 사건 부동산이 포함된 빌라 5개동, 상가 2개동의 설계 및 감리계약을 체결한 후 그 대금 명목으로 이 사건 부동산의 소유권을 대물로 취득하였다.

The plaintiff has occupied the real estate of this case directly or indirectly for 24 years or longer.

However, since the owner of the real estate in this case is the defendant, the defendant is demanding the plaintiff to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the restoration of real name.

3. Determination

A. A claim for the registration of ownership transfer for the restoration of the true title of registration is allowed in lieu of seeking the cancellation of the registration against the present title holder by means of restoring the true title of registration, in which the person who acquired ownership by law has already been registered to indicate ownership in his/her future or acquired ownership by law.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 99Da37894 delivered on September 20, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2000Da24856 delivered on March 28, 2003, etc.) B.

First of all, as to whether the Plaintiff constitutes “a person who has completed the registration indicating ownership in the future of the Plaintiff,” the fact that the Plaintiff did not have any entry of ownership in the registry as to the instant real estate is either a dispute between the parties, or that there was no entry of ownership in the registry, may be recognized according to the entry in the evidence No. 9 (Register of

Therefore, the Plaintiff is not “a person who has completed the registration indicating ownership in his future” with respect to the instant real estate.

(c)be:

arrow