(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.19 2016나34778 (2)

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.19 2016나34778 (2)

사해행위취소

Text

1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2.In all of the lawsuits filed in the trial of the independent parties to the case;

Reasons

The main lawsuit and the lawsuit of independent party intervention shall be considered together.

1. The reason why the court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as that of "2 pages 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance". Thus, this part is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the lawsuit by an independent party is lawful;

A. After the death of D, the Intervenor, who is an independent party intervenor, considered that the instant land was not an inherited property trusted to D with the property trusted to D, and concluded an agreement on division of inherited property with a view to completing the registration of title trust after completing the registration of inheritance in the name of one of the co-inheritors B, according to the advice of a certified judicial scrivener, in order to register the title in the name of Nonparty, the title truster, among co-inheritors, pursuant to the advice of a certified judicial scrivener. If no title trust is recognized with respect to Nonparty D, this agreement is revoked because the Intervenor made an agreement on division of inherited property to waives his/her share of inheritance by mistake.

Therefore, the heir’s shares in B are merely 2/11, and each of the instant land owned by the Intervenor R, S, T, and 3/11 should be confirmed to be owned by the Intervenor U.S., and the Defendant et al. should implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for shares in 2/11 of the instant land to the Intervenor R, S, and T, and 3/11 on each of the instant land, with respect to each of the instant land owned by the Intervenor U.S.

B. We examine ex officio the legality of the lawsuit by an independent party intervention.

1. In intervention by an independent party under Article 72 of the Civil Procedure Act, a third party who claims that all or part of the object of a lawsuit is his/her own right and participates in so-called intervention in a lawsuit as a party, and a third party who asserts that he/she is entitled to infringe on his/her rights based on the result of a lawsuit is a party to

An independent party participation shall be the right of conflict between the parties.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제72조

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2020.11.26 2019가단14023

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2019. 04. 05. 선고 2018가단117133 판결

-대법원 1991. 5. 28. 선고 91다6832, 6849(참가) 판결

-부산지방법원 2016.11.25 2016가단317678

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.28 2020나53288