logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.04.26 2017가단213962
원인무효로 인한 소유권이전등기말소 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The instant land was originally owned by the network D, but on March 17, 201, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on the ground of donation, as described in Paragraph 1 of this Article, to the defendant, who is the third father of the deceased.

B. On May 31, 2016, the aforementioned D died, and its heir is the Defendant, who is a woman E, a male F, the wife of the deceased head-nam G, the H, its children, I, J, the Plaintiff, and a female.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleading

2. As to the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims

A. The plaintiff primarily asserts that the registration of transfer of ownership in this case, which is completed in the future of the defendant, is null and void since the defendant did not obtain legitimate authority from the network D and forged relevant documents and completed them at will. Thus, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of transfer of ownership in this case to the plaintiff who

However, since there is no evidence supporting the plaintiff's assertion as to the fact that the above registration of ownership transfer is completed by forged documents, the above assertion by the plaintiff cannot be accepted.

B. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's right to legal reserve was infringed upon by the transfer registration of ownership against the defendant in preliminary case.

In order to calculate the amount of statutory reserve of inheritance and shortage, active property, donated property, inheritance debts, and special benefits of the person holding the pertinent statutory reserve of inheritance at the time of the commencement of the inheritance should be asserted and proved. However, there is no assertion or proof from the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims in this case are improper and all of them are dismissed.

arrow