logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2015.08.18 2015가단475
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 3, 1965, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 3, 1965 in relation to the 338 square meters prior to Samsung-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On November 23, 2012, the deceased (F; hereinafter “the deceased”) succeeded to the deceased’s property by G, H, I, J, K, and the Plaintiff. On September 3, 2013, the deceased’s heir agreed on the division of inherited property to be owned solely by the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of evidence Nos. 1-1 through 19, and 2

2. The plaintiff, as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, purchased the land of this case on January 1, 1952, and cultivated the land of this case from that time to that time, and caused L to small the above land at around 1983, so the acquisition by prescription for possession of the above land was completed on January 1, 1972 after 20 years have passed from the above occupancy commencement date, and the ownership transfer registration for the above land was completed to the defendant who is the deceased and the Dong who is the deceased. As to the above land, the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case against the defendant, claiming that the ownership transfer registration procedure for the above land was completed on the ground of the completion of the prescription for possession transfer.

Therefore, I first examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio.

According to the above evidence, it is recognized that the deceased's basic domicile of the deceased is proved that he was residing in Sung-gun D, which is the domicile of B, entered as the owner on the registry of the land of this case in the racing-si.

However, according to the fact-finding results on the above evidence, evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the racing market of this court, and the N, the facts that the resident registration number of B, who is the holder of the land register of this case, is not indicated in the land register of this case, the front of the resident registration number of B, which is the address of the racing-si, which is indicated in the overdue list, is not a "O", and the present land cadastre B's domicile is indicated as "D".

arrow