logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.05.10 2016가합112564
소유권이전등기말소 등 청구의 소
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall be Ansan District Court for the real estate listed in paragraph 1 of the attached list.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the husband of L to the defendant B, who is the male-child of L.

B. On May 6, 1981, the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate No. 1 in the name of Defendant B, which had been subject to registration of ownership transfer under the name of M on May 6, 1981, in the price of KRW 27,296,00, and KRW 23,925,000 in the name of N on June 21, 1981, and paid all the price to the above buyers, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant real estate No. 1 in the name of Suwon District Court No. 36404, Jun. 18, 1981; and as to the instant real estate No. 2 in the name of the same registry office, No. 56830, Sep. 9, 1981.

C. M died on May 3, 2016, and N on April 26, 2002.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 8 (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased each of the instant real estate from M and N, and concluded a title trust agreement with Defendant B, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant real estate under Defendant B’s name, but the enforcement of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name was returned to the buyer’s ownership.

Defendant B is obligated to cancel each of the above registration of ownership transfer to the Plaintiff who subrogated the respective successors of each of the above sellers.

B. Determination 1) The existence of the title trust relationship (the existence of the obligation to cancel the ownership transfer registration in Defendant B) was examined, the following facts were seen earlier, or the Plaintiff’s testimony as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 5, 6 through 16, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 11 and 12, and the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole. A) purchased the real estate of this case from C who represented M under his own name on May 6, 1981 from the buyer for M in the amount of KRW 27,296,00,000, after preparing a certificate of sale in the name of the buyer as Defendant B.

arrow