logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2016.09.22 2015가단12133
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The fact that the land cadastre B was unregistered land, and the fact that the person “C” was indicated as the circumstance on August 13, 1912, when it was based on the fact that the land cadastre was recorded on August 13, 1912 is not a dispute between the parties, or that it is recognized by the statement of evidence No. 1 (including the serial number).

2. Around 1917, the Plaintiff’s main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion, D purchased the instant land from C and occupied and managed it.

D As D died on December 14, 1941, it occupied and managed the land in this case by inheritance. Since then, E died on December 17, 1975, the Plaintiff, a South Korean funeral, inherited it and has been occupied and managed until now.

Therefore, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant land upon completion of the prescriptive acquisition. Since the “C” recorded as the title holder of the assessment of the instant land is not specified, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of ownership against the Defendant.

3. Determination as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. The summary of the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits is specified as “C” by the title holder of the land of this case, and it is not possible to seek confirmation of ownership against the Defendant, claiming that the title holder acquired ownership on the ground of the completion of prescriptive acquisition. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case does not have a benefit of confirmation.

B. According to Article 245(1) of the Civil Act, in order to acquire the ownership of land through the completion of prescriptive acquisition, it is necessary to use the method of filing a claim for ownership transfer registration against the owner at the time of the completion of prescription that would lose ownership, and there is no benefit to seek confirmation that one has ownership against the State, which is a third party.

In addition, even if the period of acquisition by prescription is completed, it does not take effect immediately, but it is caused by it.

arrow