(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.16 2019나87771

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) 수원지방법원 2020.10.16 2019나87771

가등기에 기한 본등기

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.

Reasons

1. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if each evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

The reasoning of this court’s judgment is as follows, with the exception of the part of paragraphs 5 through 11 as follows: (3) the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to the reasoning of the first instance judgment.

【The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant, a partner pursuant to the instant joint project, will bear KRW 130,330,00 ( KRW 400 million x KRW 1/330,000 on behalf of the Plaintiff, and that each of the instant provisional registrations was completed, there is no objective data supporting the existence of such agreements. ④ Even if the third land does not constitute a public site to be transferred to the buyer, it is the land offered as security to the G Association to obtain a loan necessary for the instant joint project, like the first and the second land, and it cannot be deemed that the provisional registration on the third land is irrelevant to the smooth progress of the instant joint project. ⑤ Even after the completion of each of the instant provisional registration, the Plaintiff completed the transfer registration on the first and second land to the buyer who entered into the instant joint project with the Defendant, which appears to have been formally completed the grounds for registration unlike each of the instant provisional registration, and as long as each of the instant provisional registration and the Defendant’s obligation to settle the instant land does not require separate settlement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to each of the instant joint project.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.08 2014가단5133248

-의정부지방법원 2015.02.10 2014가단24662

-대법원 1989. 3. 28. 선고 88누8913 판결

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.12.12 2016가단102779

-전주지방법원 2015.01.29 2013가단31375