logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.15 2016나2051635
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is next to the judgment of the first instance.

It is identical to the judgment of the first instance court, except for the modification as stated in the following Paragraph 2, and the decision in the trial is added, and it is also accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Part 1) The amendment of the judgment of the first instance court is both regarded as a witness of the first instance court as “the first instance court. 2) The 3rd week of the judgment of the first instance court is considered to have decreased,” and the 3rd week of the same case is considered to have paid “the 3rd week” respectively.

3) The first instance court’s decision was just on the “including the virtual number” of the fourth 10th 10th s., and included “the number including the number except where the number is indicated otherwise. 4) The “registration procedure for ownership” of the first 5th s. 1 and second s. 5 of the first s. 5 and the “registration procedure for ownership transfer” of the same 9 is considered as the “registration procedure for ownership transfer”, and the “the Plaintiff” of the same 9th s. 16th s. as the “the Defendant,” and the “instant agreement” of the same 16th

5) The case was served on the Defendant on July 5, 2016 in the same State as “the first instance court,” respectively, and “the case was served on the Defendant on July 5, 2016” in the first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s second instance judgment No. 12.

The term "each kind of relationship" is changed.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The instant sales contract was terminated upon the Defendant’s request, even if the Defendant’s judgment on the grounds of appeal stated each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, evidence Nos. 4-1, 5 through 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, evidence No. 8, and evidence Nos. 20 through 30, and witness E following the Defendant’s request for testimony.

or the second sale contract of this case was not concluded

It is deemed that KRW 159,00,000 remitted on December 2, 2014 was remitted to the defendant under the instant separate contract.

arrow