logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.03.27 2013가합204412
원인무효로 인한 지분말소청구권 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the share of 20.93 out of each of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1’s Schedule, Defendant B shall:

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 9, 2013, the parties’ status DD (hereinafter “the deceased”) died. As the inheritor, the Plaintiff and Defendant B are children, and Defendant C is the spouse of Defendant B.

B. On July 17, 2012, in the presence of witness E and F, the Deceased of a testamentary document prepared by a notary public G on July 17, 2012: (a) the content that a testamentary document will be bequeathed to Defendant B with respect to real estate No. 1148, 2012; (b) on the same day, a testamentary document prepared by a notary public G preparation No. 1149, stating that a testamentary document will be bequeathed to Defendant C three real estate (hereinafter “each notarial deed of this case”).

C. At the time of the deceased’s commencement of inheritance, active property is ① each of the instant real property at the time of the deceased’s commencement of inheritance; ② shares 1/2 of the first floor Nos. 202 of Changwon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “H lending”); ③ Total financial property KRW 403,927,570.

At the time of the deceased’s commencement of inheritance, a small property of the deceased is comprised of KRW 387,700,000,000 for the lessee I, and KRW 90,000 for the repayment of the lease deposit to the non-Dong building on the ground of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter “non-Dong building”) and KRW 30,000,000 for the repayment of the lease deposit against the second and third floors on the ground of Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul Nos. 1, 5 and 11 (for each number, including various numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the deceased’s health was not very good at the time of legacy each of the instant real estate to the Defendants. Since the Defendants appears to have prepared each of the instant notarial deeds by stealing the deceased’s seal impression, the registration of transfer of ownership made in the name of the Defendants is null and void, and the Defendants are the same.

arrow