logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.05.03 2018나2067627
이전등기 등
Text

1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim added by this court is dismissed.

3. The appeal costs.

Reasons

1. The reasoning behind this Court’s explanation is the same as the entry of “1. Basic Facts” in the judgment of the court of first instance in addition to the following parts. Thus, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The status of Defendant F, G, and H as the co-defendant of the first instance judgment shall be indicated collectively as “Defendant F, G, and H”.

Part 4 of the decision of the first instance court, " December 20, 2016" in Part 11 shall be read as " December 20, 2006".

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff purchased the first and second real estate from Codefendant F of the first instance trial, from Codefendant G of the first instance trial, and from the third real estate from H, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership under the name of I in accordance with the title trust agreement with I. Therefore, the transfer of ownership in the first name concerning each of the instant real estate is registered under the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”).

(2) The Plaintiff seeks the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration in the name of the Defendants on behalf of the co-defendants of the first instance court based on the right to claim ownership transfer registration in accordance with each of the instant agreements with F, G, and H concerning each of the instant real estate in question, on the basis of the right to claim ownership transfer registration in accordance with each of the instant agreements with the co-defendants of the first instance court.

3 even if the Plaintiff purchased each of the instant real estate jointly with I, it is difficult to view that there exists a title trust as to the share of 6/10 of the Plaintiff’s ownership according to the confession of the Defendants, and therefore, the Defendants are obliged to comply with the instant claim with respect to the share of 6/10 of each of the instant real estate.

B. The Plaintiff filed a claim for the delivery of real estate against the Defendants who possessed each of the instant real estate as the 6/10 shares of each of the instant real estate and possessed each of the instant real estate.

3. Determination.

arrow