logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.09.14 2017가단20464
토지인도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, based on the facts, resides in a vinyl, deaf-do, container, etc. installed on the ground of the area of 463 square meters prior to Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate due to consultation on public land or sale on August 2017.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, entry of Eul evidence 1 through 5, purport of whole pleadings】

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff had an obligation to deliver the above land to the plaintiff on the ground of prescription for possession since the plaintiff had an obligation to deliver the land to the plaintiff on the ground of the prescription for possession, and the defendant asserted that since the possession of the plaintiff was converted into the possession of the owner on the other hand after August 9, 2006, the above claim cannot be complied with.

B. According to the evidence as seen earlier, the Plaintiff transferred to Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on July 1986 on the resident registration, and the above address was completed by dividing it into Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D on April 7, 1994. The Plaintiff was ex officio from Gangdong-gu Seoul on April 7, 1994 and transferred to Gangdong-gu, Gangdong-gu, Seoul on the same day, and transferred to Gangdong-gu, Gangdong-gu, Seoul on March 30, 1997. ② On June 30, 1969, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate due to property inheritance, and thereafter the heir owned the instant real estate by inheritance, but the Plaintiff confirmed that the ownership transfer registration was completed by filing a claim against the owner of the instant real estate on August 206 by the Seoul East District Court Decision 2006Ka5721 on July 8, 2006, the Plaintiff was obligated to own the instant real estate on March 207, 2007.

arrow