logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.10.22 2014재가단14
토지인도
Text

1. Among the lawsuits for quasi-deliberation of this case, the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)5 and 6 of the Civil Procedure Act are based on each of the grounds for retrial.

Reasons

1. Final decision subject to quasi-examination;

A. On May 30, 2001, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of inheritance by consultation and division as to 1/3 share of 1/3 of the land of Changwon District Court (hereinafter “Metropolitan District Court”) as the receipt No. 15369 on May 30, 201, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on February 21, 1992.

B. On February 22, 2006, No. 6949, the Plaintiff completed the entire transfer registration for each share based on donation on February 20, 2006, with respect to each one-third share of E and F, co-owner of the instant land.

C. On August 12, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract for the lease of the instant land from the Plaintiff’s fleet, etc. on July 22, 1992 with the Changwon District Court Tongwon District Court 2009Da7402 (hereinafter “ throughout the territory”) on August 12, 2009, on the ground of the cause of the claim that “The Plaintiff did not deliver the instant land to the lessor despite the expiration of the lease contract, and is residing on the instant land without permission, and without permission, constructing an unauthorized building on the instant land.” The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the claim, such as the transfer of land, with the network’s purport of the claim stated earlier.

(The purport of the claim is modified according to the result of an expert appraisal).

On August 17, 2009, the Council C directly served the complaint of this case, and submitted a letter of delegation that appoints attorney G as a legal representative on September 14, 2009 and a written response that contests the plaintiff's claim.

E. Since then, the deceased asserted that Gap evidence No. 4, the evidence of the lease agreement alleged in the cause of the claim, was forged or altered. On October 7, 2010, the deceased filed a counterclaim claiming the Plaintiff to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on June 1, 1968 with respect to part of the land in the instant case as to the Plaintiff as a head of Tong-Support 2010Kadan10152.

F. On November 17, 2010 and November 24, 2010 with respect to the transfer registration case of common support 2009Gadan7402 (principal lawsuit), transfer of land, etc. and ownership transfer registration case of 20152 (Counterclaim)

arrow