beta
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 registration of ownership transfer was completed on December 17, 1969 under the name of Dong on June 2, 1993 with respect to the 2,400 square meters and C 406 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) in the name of Dong on June 2, 1993.
B. The Defendant, as a project implementer of the E-Unit Agricultural Comprehensive Development Project (III), completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 12, 2017 on each of the instant land subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on June 9, 2017.
C. On June 5, 2017, the Defendant deposited KRW 6,983,200 and KRW 4,800,000 of each of the instant lands on the ground that the name of the person to be deposited was “D” and the address on the registry was “F in the Hamp-gun in the front-Nam-gun,” pursuant to Article 40(2)1 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor (hereinafter “each of the instant deposits”) by the Gwangju District Court Branch Decision 686 in 2017 and the Gwangju District Court Decision 687 in 2017 and Article 40(2)1 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works.
The Plaintiff is the actual owner of each of the instant lands. The Plaintiff asserted that G, who was in charge of the property management of the Plaintiff clan, completed the registration of ownership transfer of each of the instant lands under the name of “D” in order to prevent the voluntary disposal of each of the instant lands. G’s heir filed a lawsuit against G’s heir for claiming the registration of ownership transfer of each of the instant lands under the name of “D”, and was sentenced to a non-litigation judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on March 9, 2016 (hereinafter “instant judgment”), but did not complete the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff as to each of the instant lands.
E. In addition to the instant judgment, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the withdrawal of the deposit money No. 687 in 2017 with the Gwangju District Court, but the deposit officer did not render a judgment to the effect that the deposit officer was transferred the right to claim the withdrawal of deposit money from “D”.