logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.02.04 2015가단131662
소유권이전등기
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. It is indicated that E, having an address in Suwon-gun E, Suwon-gun, No. 2,354 (hereinafter referred to as “instant assessment land”) drafted around 1913 around 1913, was assessed.

B. The assessment land of this case was divided into F.F. No. 462 of December 31, 1958, G. G. 740 and H. H. 1,152 (hereinafter referred to as “land before the instant subdivision”). Korea completed registration of preservation of ownership on the land before the instant subdivision on May 31, 1961.

C. The land prior to the instant partition was divided into 1,746 square meters on September 28, 2006 with the instant land and 1,746 square meters on September 28, 2006, following the change of administrative district.

The land of this case was under the circumstances of the above E, but was disposed of to J prior to the Farmland Reform Act, and among them, the land before the division was disposed of by J.

E. The J died on July 5, 1950 and succeeded solely to the Plaintiff.

F. On July 5, 1996, K had purchased the land of this case from E, and filed a claim lawsuit against the Republic of Korea and E for confirmation of ownership, etc. with the court 92 Ghana15853, and confirmed that “Korea shall confirm that the land of this case was owned by E, and E shall implement the procedure for registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of this case.” According to the above judgment, K shall complete registration of ownership transfer in the future of E in lieu of E on December 1, 1992, in lieu of E on the land of this case before the partition, and completed registration of ownership transfer in the future of K. On July 5, 1996. (2) M, N,O, and P (hereinafter the above four persons were added to “M, etc.”).

The Court filed a lawsuit against L, 203da78249, and M, etc. filed a lawsuit against L, and the above judgment of 92da15853, which was filed by K, against E, is null and void since it was a judgment against the deceased.

arrow