logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016. 04. 28. 선고 2016두32107 판결
(심리불속행) 매매계약한 토지에 대하여 합의해제 하였으나 사실상 소유한 것으로 보아 미등기양도자산에서 제외되는 자산으로 볼 수 없음[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Gwangju High Court-2015Nu-5824 ( October 07, 2016)

Title

(Trial Disorder) The agreement on the land which was concluded for sale is terminated, but it shall not be deemed as having been owned, and it shall not be deemed as assets excluded from unregistered transfer assets.

Summary

(The main point of the judgment below) The land within the land transaction permission zone was canceled after the purchase contract was terminated, but the purchase price was paid in full and was actually owned by establishing a mortgage creation registration of neighboring land. The land compensation was received in full, thus unregistered transfer.

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Judgment of the lower court

The Appellants’ grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal are examined as well as the records of this case.

The argument about the appeal procedure does not include the reasons prescribed in the subparagraphs of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Procedure of Appeal.

Since it is deemed that there is no reason or reason, all appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow