소유권이전등기
1. The request for intervention of an independent party intervenor raised in the trial shall be rejected;
2. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
3...
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding a judgment on the legitimacy of a request for intervention by an independent party, and thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the request for intervention by an independent party
A. 1) Summary of the application for intervention by an independent party intervenor 1) The plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the construction execution and construction execution business, which is an independent party intervenor (hereinafter “participating”).
(2) On September 3, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract to support the partnership’s business affairs and entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for KRW 150,00,000 on behalf of the Intervenor with respect to the instant land included in the project site of the regional housing association (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
A) The instant sales contract was duly concluded, and the Defendant received KRW 35,00,000 in total as part of the down payment and the remainder, and the Intervenor obtained authorization to establish an association around February 27, 2015, and the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 115,00,000 from the Intervenor (i.e., KRW 150,000 - KRW 35,000 - KRW 35,000) to the Intervenor at the same time to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer of the instant land. (ii) The Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract on behalf of the Intervenor in accordance with the said service contract, and the actual buyer of the instant land was the Intervenor. Therefore, the Intervenor sought confirmation that the Intervenor had the right to claim ownership transfer registration against the Plaintiff.
B. (1) Determination 1) Whether the application for intervention in the part of the claim for confirmation of ownership transfer registration is lawful or not is a legitimate litigation requirement, since the application for intervention in an independent party is substantially new lawsuit.
On the other hand, the lawsuit for confirmation is the most effective and appropriate way to resolve the dispute, where the applicant's right or legal status is in danger and the confirmation judgment is rendered.