beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact of recognition is that the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate under the separate sheet No. 6132, Jun. 19, 1981, as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 7 and No. 8 on Nov. 10, 1969 as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2204 on Apr. 14, 1979; as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1,3, and No. 2781 on Mar. 31, 1981; as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, 5, and 6132 on Jun. 19, 1981.
(1) Each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) and each of the above registrations of ownership transfer completed on each of the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant registrations of ownership transfer”) / [this ground for recognition] without dispute, entry in the evidence No. 6
2. Determination
A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (the plaintiff's assertion) completed the registration of ownership transfer of this case on November 10, 1969 on the ground of the sales contract for each real estate of this case. However, the plaintiff's father C who was the owner of each real estate of this case died on October 6, 1968. Since the defendant was unable to purchase each of the real estate of this case from C after C's death, the defendant, despite the fact that C purchased each of the real estate of this case from C, by deceiving the guarantor as if the defendant purchased each of the real estate of this case from C, completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Act on Special Measures
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff donated each of the instant real estate from C on May 10, 1968, and the Defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant real estate.
Luxembourg Defendant’s argument that the Defendant purchased each of the instant real estate from C around 1966 to 1967, and thus, the respective transfer registrations of ownership are legitimate, and even if not, they are not so.
The defendant is also the defendant.