logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016.01.28 2014다74698
소유권이전등기
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the ground of appeal on the validity of the designation of a rearrangement zone for housing reconstruction, the alteration of designation, and the exercise of the right to demand sale, the lower court determined that the instant disposition for approving the establishment of an Ansan market and the Plaintiff’s right to claim sale of this case cannot be deemed to be null and void as a matter of course solely on the ground that there is a defect in the procedure that the Ansan market omitted the topographical map at the time the designation of the rearrangement zone for housing reconstruction and the alteration of designation was announced in the official gazette at the time of the announcement of the designation of the rearrangement zone for housing reconstruction and the alteration of designation, and that the defect in the disposition can not be seen as ab

Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity of the notification of topographic drawings under the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use, lack of standing due to defects in the disposition approving the establishment of a partnership, and

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the grounds of appeal as to the duplicate lawsuit, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning, and, inasmuch as the land before and after the annexation cannot be specified, it is difficult to view that the subject matter of the lawsuit in question is identical to the subject matter of the lawsuit in question, even if the land before and after the annexation is the same as the part of the land of this case, which is the land after the annexation. ② Specific part of the land within one parcel and a specific share among the entire land

arrow