소유권확인
1. The Defendant Republic of Korea confirms that the 149 square meters wide and 149 square meters wide are owned by Defendant B.
2. Defendant B shall be the Plaintiff.
1. Determination as to the claim against the Defendant’s Republic of Korea [2015Kadan23785]
A. As to the judgment on the instant safety defense, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the said Defendant’s claim against the said Defendant for the confirmation of ownership is unlawful as it did not have any interest in confirmation, since it was registered as the owner on the land cadastre of Gangseo-si Cung-si, 149 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
According to Article 65 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, a person who proves that he/she or his/her predecessor is the owner in the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre by a certified copy of the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre register may apply for registration of ownership of the land, and a person who is not entitled to such certification by the register may apply for registration of ownership of the land by proving his/her ownership by a judgment. However, if the part omitted in the indication of owners on the land cadastre of unregistered land is not certain, the owner may not make registration of ownership of the land in the register, and there is a benefit to seek confirmation of his/her ownership of the land against the State for registration of ownership
(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da34390 delivered on July 10, 2001, etc.). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the health account statement and evidence No. 3 in this case, the land of this case is unregistered real estate and is registered in Defendant B in the future on the land cadastre restored on December 20, 1959, and is registered as the owner’s restoration. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it is reasonable to deem that the land of this case is owned by Defendant B as the owner of the land cadastre.
However, since the land cadastre of this case does not state the address, resident registration number, etc. in addition to the name of the defendant B, it cannot be specified as the land cadastre owner. Thus, the plaintiff applied for registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the defendant B and then the defendant B.