(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.05.16 2017나56141

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) 부산고등법원 2018.05.16 2017나56141

가등기말소

Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part concerning the counterclaim of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff C) is modified as follows.

Reasons

Of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance which partially accepted the judgment, the judgment on the basic facts, the claims of the principal lawsuit, and the judgment on the counterclaim claims is "the judgment on the counterclaim claims from the 1. Basic Facts of the judgment of the court of first instance to the 3. counterclaim claims"

B. 1) Part 3: (a) the fourth 4 to the fourth 7th 19th 19th son of the judgment of the first instance; (b) the court of first instance shall dismiss “this court” below the fifth 3th st son of the judgment of the first instance as “court of the first instance”; and (c) the end of the sixth 9th 9th son shall add “it is insufficient to recognize that the provisional registration of this case is valid even if the record of evidence No. 7-1 submitted by Defendant B in the trial or the result of the party’s personal examination of Defendant C in the court of this case is added, and there is no other evidence to support the registration.” In addition to the use after the dismissal as set forth in paragraph 2 below, it shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, it shall be as follows from the seventh 20th 8th 7th son of the judgment of the first instance to be used.”

The fact that the provisional registration No. 2 of this case was completed on the ground of the purchase and sale reservation made on March 21, 2008 in March 21, 2008 is as seen earlier.

In addition, according to the statement in Eul evidence No. 4, the plaintiff and defendant C entered into a pre-contract to sell the real estate No. 2 of this case for KRW 400,000,000 on March 21, 2008; ② the agreement that the sale becomes effective after March 21, 2009, which was set as the date of the completion of the pre-contract; ③ the plaintiff entered into an agreement to receive KRW 400,000,000 from the defendant C and to deliver the real estate to the second real estate on March 21, 2008.

[Defendant C asserts that the gift reservation was made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C, despite the entry of No. 4 (the pre-sale agreement).

However, a disposal document is recognized as authentic.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2014.12.12 2014나51061

-서울고등법원 2018.10.26 2018나2006707

-서울고등법원 2017.10.19 2017누51947

-서울고등법원(춘천) 2019.12.11 2019나50722

-부산고등법원 2019.11.13 2019나52914