beta
Text
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
In the first instance court, the Plaintiffs sought implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of each registration of preservation of ownership with respect to the land listed in the attached list 1 through 8 (hereinafter “instant land”) against the Defendant. The first instance court accepted the claim concerning the instant 1 through 5, and dismissed the claim regarding the instant 6, 7, and 8.
The defendant only appealed against the losing part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the court of this case only determines the claim on the land of this case 1 to 5.
Basic Facts
The court's explanation on this part is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore cites this part as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
In full view of the fact that the title holder of each of the lands of this case and the identity of the plaintiffs was the same person, whether the title holder of each of the lands of this case and the identity of the plaintiff N is the same person, and the residence of each of the lands of this case coincide with M, and that there are no special circumstances to deem that the plaintiffs had resided in the same other person at the time of the land situation of this case in M, it is reasonable to view that the title holder of each of the lands of this case and the identity of the plaintiffs was the same person.
A person registered in the land investigation register where the duty of cancellation of registration of ownership preservation has occurred shall be presumed to be a landowner unless there is any counter-proof that the situation has been changed by an adjudication (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da13686, Sept. 8, 1998). If the presumption of registration of ownership preservation is revealed to have been obtained by a person other than the title holder of the registration of ownership preservation, the presumption of registration of ownership preservation shall be broken if the person other than the title holder of the registration of ownership was found to have been informed of the relevant land, and such registration shall be null and void, unless the title holder proves that he/she acquired the relevant land by specific succession.