logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원의성지원 2016.09.07 2015가단10648
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The defendant is Daegu District Court with respect to the share of 20/26 square meters among the share of 39,669 square meters of the 39,669 square meters of the Gyeongdong-gun's forest in

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. E, upon the death of around 1963, succeeded to the following property by the Defendant, K, L, and B, who is a child between the spouse F, F, H, I, and the subsequent JJ.

The shares of inheritance in relation to the F (1986 Death) 2/26 Defendant 1 2/26, the 4/26 K (2015 Death) of Plaintiff A 4/26, Plaintiff B 4/26, and 2/26 H 1/26 H 1/26 H 1/26, and 2/26 L 26, respectively.

B. The registration of ownership transfer under M on February 26, 1949 and the registration of ownership transfer under E on the same day was completed with respect to the land as indicated in paragraph (1) of this case (hereinafter “instant land”). However, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Forest Land, which was in force on July 21, 1970 (Act No. 2111, May 21, 1969; hereinafter “Special Measures Act”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' arguments and the key issues of this case asserted that the defendant should cancel the registration of transfer of ownership of this case by using a false letter of guarantee and a written confirmation by the defendant's other inheritors, and on the other hand, the defendant argued that the plaintiff Gap completed the registration of transfer of ownership of this case under the name of the defendant around 1970 after he donated the land of this case from E around 1960. As such, the issue of this case is whether the defendant proven that the facts alleged to be acquired are true, and thus, the presumption power of registration under the Act on Special Measures has been broken.

3. Judgment on the issues of this case

A. The registration under the Act on Special Measures for the relevant legal principles is completed in accordance with the legitimate procedure prescribed in the same Act.

arrow