logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.10.21 2015가합54116
소유권이전등기
Text

1. Defendant D Co., Ltd. concludes a transfer agreement on October 30, 2012 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Since August 11, 2000, each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) that was originally owned by Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) (the real estate was 6,154 square meters in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, and was divided on May 20, 2005) was registered for transfer of ownership by shares to the members of the wood processing complex and the non-party F. The ownership relationship was organized by completing transfer of ownership in the sole name of F.

However, the F was only a formal owner to secure the performance of a separate proposal against the above members, and it still was the owner of the defendant D.

B. Thereafter, Defendant B and C on behalf of Defendant D in subrogation of F around 2005.

On September 204, 2004, respectively, filed a lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure of cancellation registration for the registration of ownership transfer in the name of F, and one-half of shares among the land in this case against Defendant D, and won the entire registration of ownership transfer due to a sales contract concluded on September 20, 2004 (In Incheon District Court 2004Gahap1512, 2005Gahap2031). Based on this, the registration of ownership transfer for each of the above 1/2 shares (hereinafter “each of the instant shares transfer”).

C. However, Defendant C is currently above B.

A title trustee who is delegated and managed by Defendant B with respect to the share of 1/2 as stated in the paragraph is not a substantive right holder.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 4, and 6 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D

A. The parties’ assertion asserts that the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant D with respect to the land of this case for the purpose of securing the claim against Nonparty G, etc., and sought the implementation of the registration procedure for transfer of ownership of the said land against Defendant D.

arrow