logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2021.01.28 2020나2018727
소유권이전등기
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs and the claims changed in the trial are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is that the court of first instance citing this case is identical to the part of the plaintiffs' claim for registration of transfer of ownership against the defendant, except for the following cases. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

From the 16th parallel to 4th parallel of the judgment of the first instance, “The Defendant, the owner of the instant land, has the obligation to perform the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership due to the restoration of real name with respect to the shares stated in the attached Table 1 out of the instant land.”

The 21st to 12th parallels in the judgment of the first instance shall be conducted in the following manner:

“D.”

An application for the registration of transfer of ownership for the restoration of real name for the determination of the registration of transfer of ownership due to the restoration of real name against the defendant is allowed in lieu of seeking the cancellation of the period against the current registration titleholder by the person who has already registered ownership in his/her own name or who has acquired ownership by law to restore the real name (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da24856, Mar. 28, 2003). The above claim by the plaintiffs cannot be accepted for the following reasons.

1) Even according to the plaintiffs' assertion, there was no registration to indicate the plaintiffs' ownership in the land of this case.

2) The Act on Temporary Measures for Self-Support Guidance Projects cited by the plaintiffs and the guidelines for implementing self-help labor projects are merely suggesting the distribution of land to the tax residents who participated in the relevant projects as discretionary or abstract plans. Thus, unless the selection of the persons subject to distribution or the conclusion of an individual distribution contract is made, the mere fact that the tax residents who participated in the relevant project is the tax residents who participated in the relevant project is the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership or ownership.

arrow