logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2017.02.08 2016가단6759
공유물분할등기등 청구
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a co-owner of each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”), and the Defendants are co-owners of each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant aggregate building”) with the 347.76m2, 347.76m2, 347.76m2, and 347.76m2, and 347.76m2, each of which is the 3rd floor of the housing of the 3rd floor in Hanju City.

B. As to the instant aggregate building, each land ownership of the instant case was the right to use the site, and accordingly the registration, the purport of the right to site was completed in a certified copy of the register of each of the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff seeking partition of co-owned property as to each land of this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendants. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants are co-owners of each land of this case, and rather, according to the aforementioned evidence, the Defendants are co-owners of the instant condominium building, and the facts are acknowledged, not co-owners of each land of this case.

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit seeking the partition of the article jointly owned between persons who are not co-owners of each land of this case is unlawful.

3. The Plaintiff’s claim for cancellation of the right to a site is indicated in the attached list in paragraph (1) of the attached list in the land in this case’s aggregate building, or each land listed in paragraphs (2) and (3) of the attached list, which is the object of the right to a site of the above building, in the register, even though it is not the land which is the object of the right to a site of the above building

The above "registration to the effect that it is a site right" has been made ex officio by a registrar when the "registration to indicate a site right" is made with respect to a sectioned building at the request of the owner of a sectioned building, and the "registration to indicate a site right" is a sectioned owner or a sectioned owner.

arrow