(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2014.05.22 2013가단13654

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) 창원지방법원진주지원 2014.05.22 2013가단13654

소유권이전등기 말소 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. Around 1958, C, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from D, the head of the Plaintiff, and entrusted E, who is D and his children (C’s wife), with the purchase of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

However, upon the death of C on December 23, 1961 due to the maritime accident, E completed the registration of ownership transfer and registration of transfer in its name from 1965 to 1985 using the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate, and upon the death of E on February 24, 2002, E completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate due to the agreement division of inherited property as of February 24, 2002.

However, the registration of transfer of ownership in the future of the defendant for the real estate in this case shall be cancelled because all of the registrations are invalid.

B. The summary of the defendant's assertion did not have purchased the real estate of this case from the network D, and even if there was a purchase, the plaintiff's claim is without merit since the extinctive prescription of the claim for ownership transfer registration has already expired.

2. On the other hand, the right to seek cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate against the Defendant is premised on the Plaintiff’s inheritance of the right to claim ownership transfer registration under the sales contract entered into with the Defendant D around 1958, and this is a claim with the completion of the extinctive prescription (Article 162(1) of the Civil Act) unless it is exercised for ten years (Article 162(1) of the Civil Act). The instant lawsuit was filed for about 55 years or more from the time of the sales contract alleged by the Plaintiff and

In this case, no circumstances suggesting that this case was or suspended, even if so, the real estate of this case is claimed by the Plaintiff.

참조조문

-민법 제162조 제1항

-부동산소유권 이전등기 등에 관한 특별조치법

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.07.02 2015가단8745

-대구지방법원김천지원 2014.04.23 2013가단8430

-서울북부지방법원 2019.07.03 2018가단20009

-창원지방법원 2013.02.21 2011가합993

-대구지방법원 2017.01.24 2016가단2762