등록사항정정 대위신청 처리 취소처분 등 취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a project implementer of the construction works of the 3 Section Section Section for the Suwon-Jincheon-Jincheon, and is responsible for the purchase and compensation of each of the instant land, etc. incorporated into the said project.
B. While performing land compensation duties, the Plaintiff determined that the area on the cadastral record of each of the instant land was inconsistent with the actual surveying area, and on July 1, 2014, on the ground of Articles 87 and 84 of the former Act on Land Survey, Waterway Survey and Cadastral Records (amended by Act No. 12738, Jun. 3, 2014; hereinafter “former Survey Act”), the Plaintiff filed an application for correction of registered matters in the cadastral record (hereinafter “instant application”) with a view to correcting the area of land in subrogation of the owners of each of the instant land (hereinafter “instant application”).
C. On July 8, 2014, the Defendant returned the instant application to the Plaintiff on the ground that “an application for revision of the registered matters in the cadastral record shall be filed by the landowner, and where an application for revision of the registered matters in the cadastral record is filed in subrogation of the landowner pursuant to Article 87 of the former Land Survey Act, a written consent, etc. of the relevant landowner shall be attached thereto” (hereinafter “instant previous disposition”), and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the said disposition with Suwon District Court 2014Guhap57295.
On May 12, 2015, when a project operator of a public project applies for correction of registered matters in the cadastral record on behalf of a landowner pursuant to Article 87 subparag. 1 and Article 84(1) of the former Land Survey Act, the said court rendered a judgment revoking the previous disposition of this case on the ground that the consent of the landowner or the original copy of a final and conclusive judgment equivalent thereto cannot be deemed necessary. The Defendant’s appeal (Seoul High Court 2015Nu45436) and the final and conclusive appeal (Supreme Court 2015Du52685) were all dismissed. The said judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive as is
(hereinafter “instant final judgment”). E.
The defendant is a final judgment of this case.