logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.11.28 2019가단504861
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is the Plaintiff’s birth, and Defendant C is the denial by Defendant B.

B. On December 23, 1963, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to 616/1416 shares of the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On May 31, 1985, Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “the registration of ownership transfer in Defendant B”) on February 7, 1974 under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership of Real Estate (No. 3562) with respect to share 616/14 of the Plaintiff’s title among the instant land.

On March 6, 2009, Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 4, 2009 on the part of 62/1416 of the instant land to Defendant C on the ground of donation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On February 7, 1974, Defendant B did not have an economic ability to purchase the instant land as a minor under the age of 14, and the Plaintiff did not sell the instant land to Defendant B. However, Defendant B had the opportunity to enforce the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Real Estate Ownership (hereinafter “Special Measures Act”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer with a false certification issued by pretending that the instant land was properly purchased. Thus, the presumption of the registration of ownership transfer under Defendant B’s name was broken.

Therefore, the ownership transfer registration in the name of Defendant B is invalid without a trade act, which is the ground for registration, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant C, which is based on the invalid registration as above, is also null and void. As such, Defendant C is liable to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer in the order of execution to Defendant B, and Defendant B to the Plaintiff

3. Mute in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for Determination.

arrow