(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.02.12 2018가단318958

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) 부산지방법원 2019.02.12 2018가단318958

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C was married with D on May 24, 1941, but died on January 2, 2007 (D died on February 17, 201), and was registered as E, Plaintiff, F, Defendant, and G.

B. On August 22, 2017, F: (a) died on August 22, 2017 (hereinafter “the deceased”); (b) on real estate owned by the deceased, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on November 7, 2017 on August 22, 2017 on the part of Defendant on the ground of inheritance by consultation and division.

C. Meanwhile, on July 30, 2018, H filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of existence of paternity relation against G, etc. (the Busan Family Court 2018ddan210108), and the Busan Family Court rendered a judgment on October 18, 2018, that “The existence of paternity relation between G and D and the deceased and the deceased is confirmed,” and that each paternity relation between H and G and H and the deceased exists.” The judgment became final and conclusive on November 9, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff is the deceased's heir, on the premise that the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the agreement division on the premise that he is the deceased's heir, and that the defendant is obligated to implement the registration of ownership transfer for 3/1 share, which is the plaintiff's share of real estate, due to the recovery of real name

B. The reasoning of the judgment reveals that the Plaintiff is the deceased’s heir solely based on the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff is the deceased’s heir. Rather, as seen earlier, the first-class heir of the deceased may be recognized as the deceased’s mother. As such, the first-class heir’s assertion on a different premise is without merit without further review.

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

유사 판례

-대구지방법원김천지원 2020.06.17 2019가단32435

-부산지방법원 2016.05.19 2015가단237669

-서울남부지방법원 2018.09.07 2017가합111476

-부산지방법원 2019.09.18 2018가합47079

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.29 2015가단5360849