logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단17191
부동산소유권이전등기절차이행
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Plaintiffs and net G (Death on July 25, 2013) are children of the network A.

Attached Form

The registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 21, 2002 at the network G on July 30, 2002, and on September 3, 2013, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on July 25, 2013 as to the 44.69/85.95 (hereinafter “instant 3 real estate”), among the 3 real estate listed in the list 1 and 2 real estate (hereinafter “instant 1 and 2 real estate”) and the 44.69/85.95 (hereinafter “instant 3 real estate”).

The deceased died on August 11, 2016, while the instant lawsuit was pending, and the Plaintiffs, the inheritor, taken over the instant legal proceedings.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 through 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including partial Nos. 1, 5, 8 through 10, the plaintiffs' assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiffs' assertion of the plaintiffs' assertion that Eul donated each of the above real estate to the deceased G on the ground that Gap purchased each of the above real estate from H with its own money and then the deceased G supported himself.

Since the defendant succeeded to each of the instant real estate from the deceased G, he/she should be responsible for the obligation to support the deceased A, but did not perform the obligation to support.

Accordingly, the network A cancels the above-paid donation contract concluded with the Defendant through the service of a copy of the complaint of this case with the Defendant G.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the ownership transfer registration procedure with respect to one-fifth shares of each of the instant real estate as the result of the cancellation of the ownership transfer contract, which was made to the plaintiffs who are the successors of the deceased A.

Judgment

The evidence No. 7-1 and witness I’s testimony alone are insufficient to recognize that the deceased purchased each of the instant real estate with its own funds and donated it to the deceased G, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Even if it is recognized that the deceased Gap donated each of the instant real estate to the deceased G, the other party's burden of donation (Article 561 of the Civil Act).

arrow