logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2013.01.23 2011가단30912
소유권이전말소등기등
Text

1. Of the principal lawsuit of this case, the part of the claim against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) shall be the opposing defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 8, 2011, the Plaintiff resided with the deceased H (hereinafter “the deceased”) for about ten (10) years until he/she died of the dunes cancer. Defendant B, C, D, E, and F are the deceased’s children and heir, respectively. The inheritance ratio is 1/5.

B. Around July 2008, the Plaintiff disposed of a restaurant operated with the deceased (a new address in Daegu-gun I:J located in Daegu-gun Lgu-gun L), and on July 1, 2008, the Plaintiff leased each real estate listed in the separate sheet from Defendant G (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Defendant G to operate the restaurant with its trade name by setting the deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 300,000, and the lease period of KRW 24 months.

C. As above, Defendant G sold the instant real estate to another person while running a restaurant as above, the deceased prepared a sales contract with Defendant G to purchase the instant real estate in KRW 157,000,000 between Defendant G on April 2, 2009 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the deceased.

(Seoul District Court Decision 43626 of April 28, 2009). Afterward death, Defendant B, C, D, E, and F, a successor, completed each registration of ownership transfer by inheritance shares.

(No. 127599, Oct. 4, 2011). [Grounds for recognition] of no dispute, Gap evidence No. 1 through 5, 7, Eul evidence No. 1 (including various numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The plaintiff asserted that the sales contract of this case was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant G. Since only the ownership transfer registration was made in the future of the deceased pursuant to the title trust agreement between the plaintiff and the deceased (the third party registered title trust) and the ownership transfer registration in the name of the deceased that was completed therefrom, and the ownership transfer registration in the name of the defendant B, C, D, E, and F that was completed on the ground of inheritance is both null and void. The defendant G has the right to claim the cancellation registration for the above ownership transfer registration, and the plaintiff is with the defendant G.

arrow