승낙의 의사표시 이행 청구의 소
1. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff:
A. As to the real estate stated in the attached list No. 1, the Suwon District Court's Mapo District Court's Office.
In fact, the Plaintiff purchased land C and D from the Korea National Housing Corporation on October 1994, and around February 1995, the Plaintiff started construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) to build E of the fourth and eighth underground floors on the said land (hereinafter “instant building”).
Around September 29, 197, the Plaintiff experienced difficulties in the progress of the construction due to the shortage of funds, and entered into a contract with F for the instant construction project. In fact, G, a dynamic G, of F, voluntarily raised funds, was performing the instant construction as the head of the site office. Since then G continued the construction by succeeding to the said contract, G continued the construction and occupied the site at around 70-80% of the instant building at around April 200.
Meanwhile, on September 27, 2001, Suwon District Court Decision 2001Kadan11696, rendered a provisional disposition order regarding No. 109, 110, and 111 of the instant building. The registration of ownership preservation (hereinafter “registration of ownership preservation”) was completed in H’s name with respect to 60 stores other than No. 112 of the instant 61 stores among the 61 stores of the instant building, including the portion that had not been subject to provisional disposition as well as the said three real estate due to the mistake of a public official entrusted with the registration of provisional disposition of the said three real estate.
The Plaintiff himself is the owner (the original acquisitor) of the instant building, and the registration of preservation of ownership of the instant building was deemed null and void. The registration of preservation of ownership was also included in H 58 stores (hereinafter “instant 58 stores”) with the exception of subparagraphs 109 through 111 of the instant building, which had not been completed in the name of H 112.
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the instant registration of initial ownership, etc., which had been completed in relation to the Plaintiff, and H purchased the instant building from G who acquired the original ownership of the instant building, and thus, the instant registration of initial ownership in H’s name is valid in accordance with the substantive relationship.