B. If a foreigner registers the transfer of ownership due to the termination of a title trust, it is necessary to grant permission under the Foreigner’s Land Acquisition Act (affirmative)

(b) In order for a foreigner to register in his name after being entrusted with a title of registration of real estate owned by him to a Korean national or any other person, the foreigner shall obtain permission under the Foreigner’s Land Acquisition Act.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

In light of the fact that the current law does not recognize the capacity of the so-called non-corporate association, but real estate belonging to the collective ownership of the non-corporate association under Article 30 of the Registration of Real Estate Act can be registered under the name of the non-corporate association, it is interpreted that the foreign corporation under Article 1(b)(5) of the Foreigner's Land Acquisition Act includes the non-corporate association of such foreign country

In the title trust relationship, even though the right is reserved to the truster, the right is externally transferred to the trustee, so it is merely the recovery of his/her right in the case of termination by the truster, or the acquisition of a new right externally. Therefore, the foreigner should obtain permission in accordance with the Foreigner's Land Law in order to register in his/her name by cancelling the title of registration of real estate owned by him/her in his/her own country or any other person after being entrusted with the title of registration.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that a foreign non-corporate group, such as the plaintiff, cannot be an organization that can acquire rights to land under the Foreigner's Land Law. This point of view is erroneous, but the plaintiff's school has never obtained permission to acquire rights to the land of this case in its name until now, and the conclusion that the plaintiff's school cannot accept the claim for the registration of transfer of ownership of this case is justifiable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles like the plaintiff's theory or in the incomplete hearing, nor in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the plaintiff'

The theory of lawsuit argues that a favorable judgment is necessary to obtain permission under the Foreigner's Land Acquisition Act, but for this purpose, it is not possible to accept the claim for the registration of ownership transfer of this case on the sole basis of the above circumstance, aside from seeking confirmation of the existence of title trust relation to the land of this case against the defendants. The arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.