(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가단2713

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) 서울북부지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가단2713

소유권이전등기

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the child of the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) who is the former owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). The Defendant is the spouse of the deceased.

B. On June 18, 2013, the Deceased donated the instant real estate to the Defendant and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the name of the Defendant on July 15, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant gift contract”). C.

On July 16, 2013, the deceased died. The deceased’s heir is a child between the non-party D, E, F, and the deceased and the non-party G (hereinafter “the deceased”) who is the spouse, and between the deceased and the Defendant. The deceased, H, I, etc. are children.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) In the first place, the deceased was hospitalized in the middle patient room from the date of the instant donation contract to the date of completion of the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant, and thus, it was impossible to indicate the contract and the applicant’s intention for registration. The Defendant’s registration of transfer of ownership is null and void as it is the cause of completing the registration of ownership transfer by preparing at will the donation contract in the name of the deceased and completing the registration of ownership transfer, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to perform the registration procedure for ownership transfer of 2/15 shares equivalent to the Plaintiff’s shares in inheritance among the instant real estate. 2) Preliminaryly, even if the instant donation contract is valid, the Defendant violated the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to perform the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on legal reserve of inheritance as to the portion of 1/15 shares in the Plaintiff’s

B. We examine the determination of the primary claim for the judgment, and described in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, respectively.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2015.11.27 2015나2490

-대전지방법원논산지원 2020.10.15 2019가단22183

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2013. 08. 13. 선고 2012가단3918 판결

-서울남부지방법원 2018.11.06 2017가단231489

-청주지방법원 2016.07.15 2016가단104395