logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.12.06 2018가단2468
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 80,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from October 19, 2018 to December 6, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is the remaining birth of the plaintiff's spouse D, and the plaintiff is filing a divorce lawsuit with D.

B. On January 18, 2006, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 80,000 to the Defendant.

C. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 3, 2006 with respect to C Forest land 41,980 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. On January 31, 2006, the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant, and the Defendant’s type E invested KRW 120,000,000 per capita, and jointly purchased the instant real estate on January 31, 206. The registration of ownership transfer was made under the name of the Plaintiff upon the Plaintiff’s request.

However, even though the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to register the transfer of ownership of 1/3 of the instant real estate, the Defendant did not transfer it.

B. Since a person registered as an owner of a real estate is presumed to have acquired ownership by due process and cause, the fact that the registration was based on the title trust has the burden of proof for the claimant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da82913 Decided June 23, 2015, etc.). In light of the following, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff jointly purchased the instant real estate with the Defendant and E, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's primary claim is without merit.

3. Determination on the conjunctive claim

A. On January 18, 2006, the plaintiff transferred KRW 80,000,00 to the defendant on January 18, 2006. The defendant asserted that it is a loan, and the plaintiff also files a preliminary claim on the premise that it is a loan.

hereinafter the above 80,000,000 won is the case.

arrow