[폐쇄등기말소등][집28(1)민,36;공1980.3.1.(627) 12543]
Whether it is possible to request the recovery of registration of closure
The registration entered in the closed register shall not be effective as the current registration and shall not be claimed for the recovery of the registration, as there is no legal provision regarding the recovery procedure.
Article 75 of the Registration of Real Estate Act
Supreme Court Decision 78Da1089 Delivered on September 25, 1979
Plaintiff 1 and one other (Attorney Lee Jae-won, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Countries
Gwangju High Court Decision 77Na326 delivered on October 11, 1979
The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.
ex officio, registration entered in the register of amba-type and closed-type shall not be effective as the current registration, and the recovery procedure shall not be claimed without any legal provision (see Supreme Court Decision 78Da1089, Sept. 25, 1979). However, the court below's approval of the plaintiffs' claim to cancel the registration of closed-type on the ground that it is illegal for the reason that the court below changed the land category in the country of the defendant to a river and registered the closure on the ground that the registration of the Gwangju District Court was a river site in the registration of the Gwangju District Court, despite the fact that it is not a river actually.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)