소유권이전등기말소등기 등
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasons why the party members of the judgment of the court of first instance should explain this case are as follows, under Chapter 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance, as to the matters alleged by the plaintiff against the dismissal of the defendant at the trial of the court of first instance.
Part 5, paragraph 10, the following 2:
Except for addition of each judgment like Paragraph 1, it is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. On this issue, the Plaintiff asserts that Article 8(2) of the Act on Special Measures may not attach a guarantee certificate under Article 10(2) of the Act on Special Measures when the State or a local government applies for the issuance of a confirmation certificate on real estate which was already owned by the State or a local government but whose name was not yet registered as the State or a local government. However, there is no evidence as to whether the said land was already owned by the State or a local government at the time of the completion of the registration of transfer of ownership in the future of the defendant Goyang-si as to the land prior to the merger of this case, and therefore, it is not subject to Article 8(2) of the Act on Special Measures, and therefore, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant Goyang-si, which
The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since the defendant Goyang-gu could not submit the documents or materials that caused the acquisition of ownership of the land before the merger of this case as of the present market price of the defendant Goyang-gu.
Next, even if the transfer registration under the name of the defendant Goyang-si was made only by the certificate of ownership transfer.
Even if the person entitled to make a registration and the person to issue a written confirmation coincide with each other, the competent authority is unable to secure the truth and thus the presumption power of registration is broken. However, the purport of Article 8(2) above is that of the Act on Special Measures and its confirmation.