§ 564. One-way promise for sale under the Civil Code

00 Registry office of June 20, 1998, the provisional registration of the right to request the transfer of ownership, which was completed under subparagraph xxx, etc.

D. The procedures will be implemented.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

A. The Plaintiff is the tax creditor of Nonparty BB. On December 30, 1998, the Plaintiff seized the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by BB to collect the delinquent tax amount of BB on December 30, 1998, and related thereto until February 19, 2018, the delinquent tax amount of BB’s national tax (unit: source) is as follows.

B. As to the instant real estate, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer became final and conclusive. ① On June 20, 1998, CCC completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer on the ground of trade reservation made on August 20, 1997 (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”). ② DDR on July 25, 2003 completed the additional registration concerning the instant provisional registration on the ground of transfer of contract made on July 24, 2003. ③ On October 14, 2004, the Defendant completed the previous additional registration as to the instant provisional registration on the ground of transfer of contract made on July 24, 2003.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Both claims;

A. The plaintiff

As of October 14, 2014, which was ten years from October 14, 2004, the date of the purchase and sale reservation, the Defendant’s right to the instant real estate expired after the lapse of the exclusion period. Nevertheless, the tax obligor BB did not seek the cancellation of the instant provisional registration against the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff seeks the cancellation of the instant provisional registration by subrogation of BB for the purpose of preserving the tax claim against BB.

B. Defendant

The provisional registration of this case is the provisional registration of security in the following circumstances. ① BB borrowed x0,00 won from CCC among the purchase price of this case and borrowed x0,000 won from DD in order to repay the loan borrowed from DD. ② CCC borrowed xx0,000 won from the Defendant again in order to repay the loan borrowed from DD. ② CCC completed the provisional registration of this case as the provisional registration of this case with x0,000 won and xx0,000 won as the security provisional registration of this case: (3) BB paid x0,000 won to the Defendant from October 4, 2007 to October 25, 2012; and (4) CCC completed the provisional registration of this case with x0,000 won and x0,000 won as the interest payment of the Defendant’s xB.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim based on the premise that the provisional registration of this case is the provisional registration for ownership transfer right cannot be complied with.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the contents of evidence Nos. 1 through 13 as a whole, the following circumstances are revealed.

(1) The reason for the provisional registration of this case between BB and CCC is deemed to have been a provisional registration for preserving the right to claim ownership transfer. The pre-contract (Evidence 1) drafted between BB and CCC on August 20, 1997 entered into between BB and the real estate purchase price of this case shall be KRW x0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, or0, or0,000,

(2) Even if the provisional registration of this case was transferred in succession to the defendant, the above provisional registration is deemed to have been maintained without any change. ① On July 24, 2003, a certificate of provisional registration of transfer of ownership transfer right prepared between CCC and DDD (Evidence B) is stated to the effect that the provisional registration of ownership transfer right held by CCC is transferred to DD. ② The certificate of transfer of right of provisional registration made between DD and the defendant on October 12, 2004 (Evidence B) provides that the right to claim transfer registration shall be transferred to the defendant (Article 1), and if the purchase and sale completion date of the pre-sale agreement became due, or if the sale completion date of the pre-sale agreement became due, the defendant shall exercise the right to claim transfer registration on the above real estate (Article 2), and if the sale and purchase contract is concluded pursuant to Article 2, the transferee shall exercise the right to claim transfer registration upon completion of the sale and purchase agreement between D and the defendant (Article B).

(3) In light of the objective circumstance or empirical rule, there are circumstances that cannot be seen as a provisional registration for security as alleged by the Defendant. ① There is no financial data, loan certificates, etc. that CCC (BB’s punishment CCC) and DD (BB’s appearance) and the Defendant lent money to BB in sequential as alleged by the Defendant, and there is no provision in the above provisional registration-related documents. ② The interest that the Defendant received is also the only source of only the number ofxxxxxxxxxxxxx numbers (including the number ofxxx numbers on May 30, 208, the number ofxxxxx numbers on December 30, 2010, and the number ofxxx numbers on October 25, 2012, it is difficult to accept the aforementioned measures that the Defendant did not recover from BB even if it was alleged to have been more than the Defendant’s appearance.

B. In light of the circumstances acknowledged above, it is reasonable to view the provisional registration of this case, which the Defendant holds a right, as the provisional registration for transfer of ownership, as the provisional registration for transfer of ownership, while it cannot be deemed as the provisional registration

C. The right to make the other party to a trade effective by expressing his/her intent to complete the pre-sale agreement, i.e., the right to complete the pre-sale agreement, if any, within a certain period of time, and within ten years from the time the pre-sale agreement is made, if no agreement is reached, and the right to complete the pre-sale is extinguished upon the lapse of the exclusion period. Meanwhile, there is no special limitation on the exercise period of the right to complete the pre-sale agreement between the parties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da42077, Jan. 25, 2017).

As seen earlier, in the instant case where the date of the completion of the purchase and sale reservation between DD and the Defendant is not separately determined, the Defendant’s right to the completion of the purchase and sale reservation regarding the instant provisional registration was terminated after the lapse of the exclusion period from October 12, 2004, which is the date of the purchase and sale reservation (at the latest, October 14, 2004, the Plaintiff’s assertion). Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to implement the procedure for the cancellation registration of the instant provisional registration on behalf of BB.

4. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.