logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.08.24 2017나201560
소유권확인
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

In accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance shall be cited in the judgment on the defense before the merits.

On February 5, 1947, H purchased 635 square meters in response to the Plaintiff’s assertion on the merits, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name as to D on March 7, 1947. H purchased 436 square meters in response to D’s strike (hereinafter “instant land”).

Therefore, the instant land constitutes the Plaintiff’s ownership.

Judgment

In light of Article 10 of the Enforcement Decree of the Cadastral Act (Presidential Decree No. 8110 of May 7, 1976) and Article 6 of the Addenda of the former Cadastral Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2801 of the same Act, hereinafter “Revised Cadastral Act”) that the matters concerning the owner of land shall not be registered for recovery without any legal basis after the enforcement of the former Cadastral Act (amended by Act No. 2801 of Dec. 31, 1975, hereinafter “amended Cadastral Act”), the name of the owner is written on the land cadastre arbitrarily restored for convenience of taxation by the competent authority before the amended Cadastral Act enters into force.

Even if there is no presumption of right, the statement can not be admitted.

In addition, if the entry of the column of the previous landowner’s land cadastre whose capacity of presumption is not recognized has been changed from the newly prepared land cadastre after the enforcement of the amended Cadastral Act, it should be deemed that there is no presumption of right as well as the matters concerning the new landowner’s land cadastre.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da202878, Jul. 11, 2013). In this case, if the purport of the entire pleading is added to the entry of evidence No. 6 (including the serial number; hereinafter referred to as “number”), the former land cadastre regarding the instant land was restored on August 1, 1961; and the current land cadastre regarding the instant land was drafted as it is for the owner’s column of land cadastre.

arrow