(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2015.11.03 2014가단218209

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) 부산지방법원동부지원 2015.11.03 2014가단218209

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts are: (a) the registration of ownership preservation under the name of E Co., Ltd. on May 8, 191 with respect to No. 3 Dong 101 (hereinafter “instant building”); and (b) the registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 8, 2012 under the name of the Plaintiff; (c) the Defendant had resided in the instant building before the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer; (d) the fact that the Plaintiff was delivered the said building to the Plaintiff on December 15, 2014 upon the Plaintiff’s lawsuit for requesting the delivery of the building that was filed by the Plaintiff on December 15, 2014 does not conflict between the parties; or (e) it is recognized by the purport of the entire statements and arguments as stated in subparagraph 1, 3-1, 2, and

2. The plaintiff asserts that he/she is the owner of the building of this case and asserts that he/she is the owner of the building of this case and sought a return of unjust enrichment from occupying and using the building of this case without title.

Since the registration of ownership transfer has been completed in the name of the plaintiff as to the building of this case, the plaintiff is presumed to have acquired the ownership of the building of this case by legitimate procedures and grounds for registration. However, registration of ownership transfer in the name of E Co., Ltd. as to the building of this case is invalid and the fact that F Co., Ltd. is the real owner of the building of this case is also the plaintiff. According to each of the evidence Nos. 10 and 11, the plaintiff entered into a sales contract with E Co., Ltd. on May 10, 191 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 8, 2012 on the ground that the registration of ownership transfer of the plaintiff is invalid as the registration completed on the basis of registration of ownership transfer of E Co., Ltd.

Therefore, the above assertion based on the premise that the plaintiff is a legitimate owner of the building of this case is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원충주지원 2016.11.16 2016가단3846

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.09.03 2013가합553786

-청주지방법원 2018.11.08 2017나14889

-대법원 1990. 5. 8. 선고 90다카1097 판결

-서울서부지방법원 2014.12.05 2014나424