logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 밀양지원 2018.11.27 2017가단12785
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

The fact that there is no dispute is purchased on February 3, 1931 and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on February 4, 1931 by purchasing C & 360 square meters (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”).

On March 17, 1989, the land before the instant partition was divided into the instant land and E-road 68 square meters (hereinafter “instant road”).

The deceased on June 18, 1994. On April 25, 2017, the non-party F, his spouse, completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land on April 25, 2017, at the same time, on April 12, 2017, to the Defendant, who is a child, on the same day, as the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land due to the donation (hereinafter “instant registration of ownership”).

Plaintiff’s assertion

After the Korean War, the Deceased donated or sold the land before the division to the Plaintiff.

At the time of the division, two buildings were respectively located in the same part and the west part of the land before the division.

In the West Building, H, I, and J resided in order following the G. On March 17, 1989, the instant land was divided into the instant land and the road around March 17, 1989, and the Western building on the instant road was removed.

After that, K used the top part of the land of this case for the purpose of putting the examination of the second part of the land of this case, and paid to the Plaintiff every year from around that time to around 1995 the end of 1st century as land usage fees.

On the other hand, from January 1, 1990, the network N has paid the Plaintiff the money equivalent to 1stma or the amount of the land usage fee every year from January 1, 1990.

Since around 1997, as the network N died in around 1994, O residing in the above building and occupied the entire land of this case as well as the above building site, and from around that time to December 31, 2010, it has been paying to the Plaintiff money equivalent to 1 to 1 to 31, 2010.

As a result, the Plaintiff.

arrow