(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.04.21 2016가단102679

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) 대구지방법원 2017.04.21 2016가단102679

소유권이전등기말소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 1917, the network D completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on March 5, 1917, with respect to the land of 1488 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On June 30, 1995, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “the registration of ownership transfer”) pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (No. 4502, Nov. 30, 1992, hereinafter “Special Measures Act”) on the ground that the instant land was donated under No. 49453, Jun. 30, 1995, which was received on October 22, 1970.

C. The network D died on October 29, 1972, and the Plaintiff is the heir of the network D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) was that the guarantor under the Act on Special Measures at the time of the transfer of ownership in this case prepared a guarantee certificate without knowledge of the alteration of rights, and accordingly the registration of transfer of ownership in this case was completed. Accordingly, the presumption of the transfer of ownership in this case was broken down as the guarantee certificate, which served as the basis for the registration of transfer of ownership in this case, proves that its substantive contents are not true.

In addition, the deceased D did not donate the land of this case to the defendant, and E, which was the representative of the defendant at the time of the registration of transfer of ownership of this case, did not know about it, and in order for a clan or a similar organization to dispose of the property, the resolution of the general meeting is required, but at the time of the registration of transfer of ownership

Therefore, since the ownership transfer registration of this case is invalid, the defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of ownership transfer of this case.

(2) The actual owner of the instant land was registered under the name of Defendant D, and the network D will future be the Defendant.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.12.07 2017나305902

-인천지방법원 2018.06.07 2017나59997

-춘천지방법원영월지원 2017.09.27 2016가단3084

-대법원 2006. 2. 23. 선고 2004다29835 판결

-대전지방법원 2018.11.16 2018나104762