beta
(영문) 대법원 2019.05.30 2015다47105

소유권이전등기말소등기 등

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Where there exists a false registration which interferes with the ownership of a person who is true on the register and the registered titleholder is an organization without a person or entity, the owner may seek for the cancellation of registration in the name of a person who has committed the actual act of registration under the name of an organization without such person or entity, as a removal of interference based on the ownership, representing the person who has committed the actual act of registration, as a removal of interference based on the ownership;

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 90Da684, 90Meu3307, May 8, 1990; 2008Ma615, Jul. 11, 2008). The registration of change in the indication of a registered titleholder is merely for the purpose of complying with the registration on the registration ledger within the scope where the identity of the registered titleholder is maintained, and it does not cause any change in the right, even in a case where the registration is erroneous, the registered titleholder shall make a registration of change by preparing a prescribed document again, and therefore, the registered titleholder shall not have the concept of the person liable for registration.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da39167 delivered on November 13, 1992). Meanwhile, a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of registration against a person liable for registration, i.e., a person who loses his/her right or is not a person subject to other disadvantage (registration titleholder or general successor), is an unlawful lawsuit against a person without standing to be a party.

(2) On February 25, 1994, the lower court: (a) based on its stated reasoning, the Plaintiff donated the instant land and the instant temple building from C, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of G company that is an organization with no substance for the purpose of tax reduction and exemption; (b) thus, the Plaintiff is null and void. In such cases, the other party entitled to file a claim for cancellation of invalid registration under the name of the owner C is the Plaintiff who actually performed the registration in the name of an organization without substance, and the representative of an organization is the principal registration of ownership transfer in the name of G company.