logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.12.05 2017나12899
소유권이전등기
Text

1. In accordance with the claim for a change in exchange in this court, the Defendant is about the Plaintiff’s forest land C, 99 square meters in Jeju.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed or added as set forth in Paragraph (2) above; and (b) the evidence submitted by the defendant at the court of first instance, which lacks to reverse the recognition of the Plaintiff's autonomous possession of the land of this case, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the rejection of all of the entries in subparagraphs 4 through 6 and witness E, and I's testimony. Therefore, this is cited by applying the main sentence of Article 4

2. All of the Plaintiff’s “Plaintiffs” shall be written by cutting off or adding to “A”.

In Chapter 2, between the fourth and fifth reduction, “A died on August 23, 2018, and all the successors, including the Plaintiff, made an agreement on the division of inherited property on October 15, 2018 to the effect that A, on October 15, 2018, claims for the registration of transfer of ownership based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition of the instant land held by A against the Defendant, was inherited by the Plaintiff alone.”

Part 4 of the 4th page "the date of selling the land before subdivision" shall be filled with "the date on which the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land before subdivision is completed".

Part 4, paragraphs 15 through 18 shall be dried as follows:

On the other hand, in cases where the transfer of ownership is registered in another person's name under one's own possession of real estate, possession of real estate cannot be deemed as possession based on the acquisition by prescription, and only when there is a change in ownership, possession based on the acquisition by prescription is commenced (see Supreme Court Decision 88Meu26574, Sept. 26, 1989). As such, as of April 23, 1990 where the transfer of ownership was completed for all the land before the partition of the land in this case, the starting date for possession based on the acquisition by prescription of A is the starting date of acquisition by transfer of ownership. As seen earlier, A continues to occupy the land in this case as the intention to own the land in a peaceful and public manner since the change in ownership occurred.

arrow