logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.20 2014가단129886
소유권보존등기말소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The 1,777 square meters (hereinafter “the original land of this case”) in the Gansung-gun of Gyeonggi-do was divided and merged with the farmland improvement on July 12, 1989, and the land of this case was the 2,195 square meters (hereinafter “the land of this case”).

B. The Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the registration of transfer of this case”) under the receipt No. 21630 of Oct. 20, 1969 with respect to the original land of this case on the grounds of sale as of June 21, 1949.

On the other hand, the owner of the ownership transfer registration of this case and other matters column are indicated as the owner’s state, the management agency’s financial department, and Article 5 of the Farmland Reform Act.

C. The farmland sheet for the original land of this case (No. 3-2) contains D's name in the prop column, and the name E's name is the Chinese characters that cannot be read in the cultivator column.

The Plaintiff, a child of F (G) who died on June 25, 1997, succeeded to the said F with 2/23 shares in accordance with the statutory shares of inheritance.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2 (including each number), Eul 3, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the original land of this case was purchased by the Defendant under the Farmland Reform Act and distributed as farmland was returned to H, which is the original owner of the farmland (or next to the fact that the land was returned to H was inherited to H), and that the Plaintiff succeeded to the registration again with the shares of 2/23 shares. Since the registration of the transfer of this case was invalid for the cause for which the sale was not constituted under Article 5 of the Farmland Reform Act, the Plaintiff asserted that one of legitimate co-owners, seeking the cancellation of the registration of the transfer of this case against the Defendant for the purpose of preserving the jointly-owned property.

B. In the event that the registration of ownership transfer has been completed with respect to real estate, the registrant is not only against the third party, but also against the previous owner.

arrow