beta
Text
1. On March 25, 2013, the Defendant’s deposit money deposited with Cheongju District Court was KRW 25,761,60,00, which was deposited with Cheongju District Court No. 644 for the year 2013.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The land cadastre B 1,789 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) was indicated as being jointly owned by C and D in the land cadastre.
B. The Defendant deposited the amount of KRW 25,761,60,00 as Cheongju District Court No. 644 in 2013 on the ground that the instant land was unregistered and the address of the person to whom the deposit was made could not be known (hereinafter “the instant deposit”).
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. In light of the following circumstances, although there is no dispute between the parties in the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, or recognized by adding the whole purport of the entries and arguments in subparagraphs 4-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 4-2 to the land of this case, that is, the land of this case is owned by D and C, and D were inherited by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), the designated parties, and Nonparty E after D died on March 13, 1999, and the resident registration number indicated in the land cadastre of this case conforms to the network D’s resident registration number, even though the address indicated in the land cadastre is different from the network D’s resident registration number, it is the same person as D, the land cadastre of this case’s land of this case and D, the decedent of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties.
Therefore, the defendant's right to claim the payment of the deposit money of this case belongs to the plaintiff (appointed party) and the designated parties in proportion to inheritance shares, and the right to claim the payment of KRW 5,152,320 (=25,761,600 x 1/5) is recognized. The defendant's right to claim the payment of the deposit money of this case has a benefit of confirmation as long as it is disputed
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating parties, on the ground that the claim of this case by the plaintiffs (appointed parties) and the designated parties is reasonable.