(영문) 대구지방법원 2021.02.03 2020가단124201

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 2021.02.03 2020가단124201

소유권말소등기

Text

The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On January 10, 2013, the fact that the Defendant completed the registration for the transfer of all co-owners’ shares (hereinafter “registration for the transfer of each of the instant shares”) on each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff and C (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) with the same shares as the Plaintiff and C on December 24, 2012 is either not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged by adding the purport of the entire pleadings to the items as stated in subparagraph 2-1 and subparagraph 2-2.

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff did not sell the plaintiff's share among each real estate of this case to the defendant, or receive the purchase price, is null and void.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to cancel the part concerning the plaintiff's share 1/2 in the registration of transfer of each share of this case to the plaintiff.

B. In the event that ownership prior to the completion of the registration period, the nominal owner of the registration is presumed to have acquired ownership based on legitimate grounds for registration as well as the third party, and thus, in order to deny it by the Plaintiff and to seek the cancellation of the period prior to ownership by claiming the invalidation of the grounds for registration, the Plaintiff is liable to assert and prove the facts constituting the grounds for invalidation (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da105215, Mar. 13, 2014). In this regard, the following circumstances revealed by adding the whole purport of the pleading to the statement in subparagraphs 1 through 4 above, namely, the sales contract made by the Plaintiff and C as of December 24, 2012, stating that each of the instant real estate is sold at KRW 20,000,000, and the Plaintiff and C affixed a seal imprint thereon to the Defendant, together with the Plaintiff and the Defendant, sold each of the instant real estate.

In light of the fact that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone was proved as a ground for invalidation.

It is difficult to see and otherwise prove this.

참조판례

-대법원 2014. 3. 13. 선고 2009다105215 판결

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2016.08.19 2015가단30703

-대구지방법원서부지원 2015.04.16 2014가단36119

-전주지방법원 2017.11.24 2017가단8465

-제주지방법원 2017.11.17 2016가단17025

-대전고등법원 2018.01.25 2017나13258