logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.02.11 2013나6025
가등기에 의한 본등기
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. As to the Plaintiff’s share of 1/2 out of 658 square meters in Yangsan-si.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Yangsan-si: D 3,065 square meters (hereinafter “land prior to subdivision”) owned E’s share of KRW 1,743/3,065, and KRW 1,322/3,065, and KRW 1,322/3,065. The Defendant, around April 13, 1998, borne with the Plaintiff each of KRW 12 million out of purchase price of KRW 24 million with the Plaintiff, purchased shares from E from E, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said purchase share under the name of the Defendant on May 1, 1998.

B. Since then, the land before subdivision was divided, following the procedure for subdivision of land and the procedure for partition of co-owned property on March 25, 1999, the land D 510 square meters and G 812 square meters is the sole ownership of F, one of the co-owners, and H 1,085 square meters is the sole ownership of F, one of the co-owners, and C 658 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) was divided into the Defendant’s sole ownership.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to own 1/2 shares of the instant land, and possessed the land by specifying its location and size, and to newly construct and reside in the part occupied by each party on the ground.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff built a single-story warehouse (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’s building”) equivalent to 56.32 square meters on the ground of the Plaintiff’s occupied part of the instant land (hereinafter “the part occupied by the Plaintiff”), and resided together with his/her family. The Defendant newly built a single-story house (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant’s building”) equivalent to 65.96 square meters on the part occupied by the Defendant among the instant land (hereinafter “the part occupied by the Defendant”), and resided in the Defendant’s building along with his/her family members.

Meanwhile, on March 25, 1999, J, the husband of the defendant, who was the plaintiff's punishment, completed registration of preservation of ownership of the plaintiff's building and the defendant's building in its own name.

The plaintiff did not transfer the ownership of the plaintiff's building and the land of this case to the plaintiff on July 25, 2001, J and the defendant transferred the ownership of the plaintiff's building to the plaintiff on March 25, 1999. The defendant transferred 1/2 of the land of this case to the plaintiff on May 1, 1998.

arrow