beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that, after citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance or taking into account the adopted evidence, the above facts alone are insufficient to confirm the fact that C and the Defendant agreed to title trust the instant real estate in the future with the Defendant, or that the Defendant would pay C the purchase price after the sale of the instant real estate, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that C and the Defendant agreed to pay C the purchase price received by selling the instant real estate
2. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that, in full view of all the circumstances, it is recognized that there was an agreement on title trust and an agreement on the payment of the purchase price at the time of sale of the instant real estate between C and the Defendant, but the lower court determined otherwise. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to title trust, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, exceeding the bounds of the rule of experience and the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and violating the rules of evidence. The lower court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on title trust without further deliberation on the circumstances in which
However, the above grounds of appeal are nothing more than the purport of disputing the selection of evidence and fact-finding, which are the exclusive authority of the court below as a fact-finding court, and it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground of appeal. Furthermore, even if the argument in the grounds of appeal is examined in light of facts and records admitted by the court below, if the ownership relationship between the other real estate registered in the name of the defendant and the real estate of this case is not necessarily the same, and as recognized by the court below,