(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.01.18 2016가단522654

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.01.18 2016가단522654

소유권이전등기

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.

2. The defendant is among each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on October 6, 2015, and the heir is the Plaintiff B, C, and C, and Defendant, the deceased’s wife F and their children.

B. The deceased owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet, but on February 1, 2008, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the gift made by the Defendant on January 28, 2008, and on January 10, 2014, on the above building, the ownership transfer registration was completed on the ground of the gift made on the same day in the Defendant’s future.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they were the deceased, and they were well aware of their physical condition, and there was no reason for the deceased to donate all their property to the defendant.

Attached Form

The registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on each real estate indicated in the list is merely a fact that the defendant, who had the deceased's seal in the name of the defendant, voluntarily completed the gift without the act of donation by using the deceased's identity, and thus, the registration of invalidity of cause shall be cancelled. However, the plaintiffs seek the implementation of the procedure

B. The evidence presented by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the donation contract concluded between the deceased and the defendant on each real estate in the separate sheet is false, and the plaintiffs' above assertion based on the premise that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it is without merit.

3. Determination on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the defendant received each real estate listed in the separate sheet from the deceased and infringed the plaintiffs' legal reserve of inheritance, which are co-inheritors. Thus, the plaintiffs are obligated to return the infringed legal reserve of inheritance to the plaintiffs.

B. The Defendant received each real estate listed in the separate sheet from the Deceased.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2018.11.02 2018나20714

-부산지방법원동부지원 2015.09.22 2014가단13893

-의정부지방법원 2021.04.27 2019가단106958

-광주지방법원목포지원 2020.02.14 2018가단55013