The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined on December 20, 197 as follows. The plaintiff borrowed 15.5 million won monthly interest with the defendant 3 on December 19, 197, or provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership due to the purchase and sale of the real estate as security is cancelled if it is repaid 17.5 million won by the above due date, while the court below decided to deliver the real estate in this case to the above defendant on the 24th day after it was delivered, and it did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the above real estate under the name of the above defendant 1 and the defendant 1 and the defendant 2, or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the above real estate ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant 1 and the defendant 3, since the above provisional registration and establishment registration were not made under the name of the defendant 1 and the above 4th day after the due date of payment, and there were no errors in the law as to the above real estate transfer registration under the name of the defendant 1 and 36th day.

2. The grounds of appeal by Defendant 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 3 (the grounds of supplementary appeal) are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the above provisional registration security right holder is obligated to take account of the following: (a) in this case where Defendant 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 3 borrowed money after the provisional registration was completed through the procedure of filing a lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff; (b) the Plaintiff failed to repay debts even after the due date, and thus, (c) in which the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of Defendant 1 and Defendant 2, it should be deemed to be the realization of secured real estate immediately; and (d) the above provisional registration security right holder is obligated to take account of the loan amount and return the remainder

However, if the so-called provisional registration security right holder intends to own the market price of the secured real estate, the market price of the secured real estate should be assessed at a reasonable price, and then the payment must be appropriated for the principal and interest of the secured real estate and the expenses to be borne by the debtor, and if any, the balance should be returned to the debtor or deposited for repayment, and if there is any balance, the secured claim cannot be deemed extinguished (see Supreme Court Decisions 75Da1608, Feb. 24, 1976; 77Da1513, Nov. 22, 1977). In this case where special circumstances such as the above statement do not occur, the judgment of the court below which concluded that the real estate was converted into the secured real estate under the name of Defendant 1 and Defendant 2, the provisional registration security right holder, was not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the execution of the provisional registration security right, or did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the disposal of the secured real estate, and thus, the remaining judgment is reversed without merit.

3. Therefore, the part against Defendants 1, 2, and 3 in the original judgment is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jung-young (Presiding Justice)