logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.02 2014가단5323294
소유권말소등기
Text

1. The defendant shall receive on January 30, 1962 from the Jung-gu District Court (Seoul District Court) registry office with respect to the land size of 698 square meters prior to G at the time of strike to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 18, 1913, the GJ residing in the GJ-gun of Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant land subject to assessment”) was assessed around 1,892 by the GJ-gun, Gyeonggi-gun, and the land number is specified only in the case of the land located in I of Gyeonggi-gun.

B. The instant assessment land was subdivided into L or M on December 29, 1961, and the N land was subdivided from O on July 9, 1975, and the P land was subdivided from Q land on July 9, 1975, and the R land was subdivided from Q land on September 26, 1976.

On the other hand, M land was merged with Q Q on August 22, 201.

C. On January 30, 1962, the registration of ownership preservation (hereinafter “registration of ownership preservation”) was completed in the name of the Defendant under the name of the Jung-gu District Court, Yangyang-dong District Court (hereinafter “instant land”) No. 217, which was received on January 30, 1962.

The assessment land in this case died on April 25, 1960 of the plaintiffs' preference K, and seven persons, including the network A, were the heir of the network K's co-property, and again the deceased on January 6, 2015, the plaintiff litigants became the heir of the network A's co-property.

Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, A

2. Determination

A. First, we examine the identity of K, the assessment title of the instant assessment land, and the identity of K and K, the Plaintiff litigants.

In full view of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7-1, 2, 1, 2, and 1 through 4 of the evidence Nos. 6-1, 2, and 7-1, 2, and 1 through 4 of the evidence Nos. 7, and the fact-finding results in the fact-finding of the court's fact-finding with respect to the head of the Sinjuriririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririri, one of the parties to the situation of this case and one of the parties to

arrow