logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.05.01 2014나38755
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except when using the last page 2 through 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

“The above house is presumed to be unique property of Defendant D, since Defendant D purchased K house in his name and registered it in his name during the marriage life with the deceased, it is insufficient to recognize that the deceased actually borne the price for the acquisition of the above house by the witness of the first instance trial, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Even if the above house is owned by the deceased and the defendant D, as alleged in the plaintiffs, and the purchase of each of the above land was made after Defendant D sold the above house, it cannot be deemed to have a title trust relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendant D, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly, the plaintiffs' assertion based on the premise that the title trust relationship between the deceased and the defendant D was established between the deceased or between the plaintiffs and the defendant D is no longer reasonable. Thus, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the order of the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow