beta
Text
1. The part concerning the preliminary claim in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's preliminary claim is dismissed;
2...
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 11, 13 through 15, Eul evidence No. 5-1, witness G of the first instance trial, and H's testimony.
The father D of the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in his name on May 1, 1980 in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 3094).
B. The Plaintiff’s father E has occupied and cultivated the land of this case since before the transfer registration of ownership in D was made with respect to the land in this case.
C. D on February 2, 1998, among the land in this case, divided into F land a part of 436 square meters in the ship which connects each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 10, and 1 in sequence, among the land in this case, “1” into F land.
On August 3, 2006, E died, and the Plaintiff independently succeeded to E’s right to the instant “bbbb” land through the agreement on the division of inherited property.
E.D died on October 10, 2007, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the land of this case on the grounds of inheritance by agreement division, and on the land of this case on November 16, 2007, on the land of this case, the registration of ownership transfer is completed in its own name on June 22, 2009.
F. The instant “A” land and “BB” land were merged on December 20, 2012, and again became the instant land.
2. The plaintiff, as to the primary claim, agreed upon between D and E on February 2, 1998 at the time of the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of this case “bb”. Thus, D's heir, pursuant to the above agreement, is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of this case to the plaintiff, who is E's heir, pursuant to the above agreement, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the existence of the above agreement.