logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.30 2016가합17151
소유권확인
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Gyeonggiwon-gun SP 788 (hereinafter “instant assessment land”) was assessed against U.S. who has an address in Gyeonggi Suwon-gun T.

(b) the Suwon-gun V stated in the Land Survey Board is currently affiliated with Wdong-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, under the administrative district.

C. On September 10, 1955, a land improvement project was implemented around 1948, and its land cadastre and cadastral map were newly prepared. On September 10, 1955, the Defendant registered the same lot number as the above land in the neighboring area and changed the number of the above X 1,902 square meters, which was first registered on July 29, 1998, into RR 1,902 square meters, and the above RR land was divided into 60 square meters on September 3, 1998, and the area of the land was 1,842 square meters.

(hereinafter “instant land”). At present, the instant land is unregistered land and is registered as owned by the Defendant on the land cadastre.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 17, 20, 22, and 22 (if any, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The plaintiffs asserted that the land of this case was divided from the land of this case in the condition of the marine area where the marine area of the plaintiffs' fleet was located, and that the plaintiffs, who inherited the land of this case in a successive order from the marine area and owned the proportion of shares in the attached inheritance shares in the attached inheritance shares table, sought confirmation of the ownership of the land of this case against the defendant. However, in light of the location, etc. of the land of this case and the land of this case, there is no evidence to recognize that the land of this case was divided from the land of this case, and therefore,

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow