(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.20 2017가단5186090

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.20 2017가단5186090

소유권확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 28, 1954, the registration of “transfer to recovery” was completed under the name of the owner C with respect to the 11st grade B B (hereinafter “land on the register”) of Pyeongtaek-gun, Gyeonggi-do. The column for receipt is written as “No. 19 years’ and the column for registration” as “trade on May 7, 1949.”

B. The official cadastral record on the Gyeonggi-si D and surrounding land was destroyed by an incident of 625, and the land and lot number on the register were restored, and the land register on the register was entered into the road category, cadastral 65 square meters, and accident column on April 21, 1971 as “state” in the owner restoration and owner’s name column.

Since then, the land was changed into 215 square meters due to the change in the area unit, and the land cadastre was prepared on September 1, 2017 by dividing the E-road into 25 square meters.

C. C died on June 28, 1991, and C’s co-inheritors including the Plaintiff (including co-inheritors of C, who died on July 23, 2004) agreed on the division of inherited property by succeeding to the Plaintiff the land on the register and the land on the attached list.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap's 1 to 8, Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff's fleet C owned D land on the registry, and died while disposing of D land by dividing it into G and H land, and owning the land on the registry. The land on the registry is the land owned by the plaintiff who succeeded from C as the same land as that on the attached list (the land to which B and E numbers are assigned on the land registry; hereinafter "the land of this case") indicated on the certified copy of the cadastral map, and the defendant asserts that the land of this case is owned by the plaintiff on the ground that the indication of the registry and the land cadastre is inconsistent, and therefore, it is argued that the land of this case

In regard to this, the defendant does not comply with the land indication on the land cadastre.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.04 2015가단159976

-부산고등법원(창원) 2015.04.02 2014나1556

-대전지방법원 2016.01.13 2015나102451

-인천지방법원 2019.03.13 2018가단248229

-서울남부지방법원 2017.01.18 2016가단215503