logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.08.24 2015가단32747
소유권이전등기
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant-owned real estate”), with respect to the instant real estate, on April 4, 1998, for the purpose of inheritance by agreement division as of March 19, 1995. (2) At the time of the registration of ownership transfer, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the inheritance by agreement division as of March 19, 1995. (2) At the time of the registration of ownership transfer, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the inheritance by agreement division as of March 19, 195, for the Republic of Korea, Goju District Court, Goju District Court, 5189 on April 4, 199, as of the F cemetery, 69 square meters in the real estate adjacent to the said Defendant-owned real estate, and the G cemetery 66 square meters in the G cemetery.

B. On May 6, 1985, H completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff, as to the 149 square meters, K prior to J, 397 square meters, and L 2,093 square meters, which were adjacent to the real estate owned by the Plaintiff, adjacent to the instant real estate (hereinafter “the Plaintiff-owned real estate”). M completed the registration of transfer of ownership on May 8, 2002 with the receipt of No. 6892 on April 22, 1996, with respect to each of the said real estate as to each of the above real estate, M completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of inheritance due to a division of consultation on April 22, 1996 by the same registry office as to one-half portion of each of the above real estate under the receipt of No. 6893, May 8, 2002.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 3-4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. From May 6, 1985, H had occupied the Plaintiff’s neighboring real estate and the instant real estate as if they were owned by the Plaintiff, in a peaceful and public performance manner, and M, the spouse of H, succeeded to the possession of the said H after H’s death. The Plaintiffs succeeded to the possession of H and M for not less than 20 years.

arrow