B. Whether the burden of proof can be converted if the forest purchaser of the forest who has completed the registration of transfer of ownership under the Act on the Special Measures is more than the date of death of the original registered titleholder

B. The registration of transfer of ownership under the Act on the Special Measures is permitted only when it is directly taken over from the registered titleholder, but also when it is taken over from a third party. Thus, the date of purchase by the person who has completed registration under the Act on the Special Measures is later than the date of death of the deceased, who is the original registered titleholder, and this alone alone lacks the legal presumption of the registration, and the burden of proving that the registration conforms to the substantive legal relationship

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below acknowledged that the forest of this case was originally owned by the deceased non-party 1, but the co-defendant 2 of the court below completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale from Sep. 15, 1958 pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Forest Ownership, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the defendant again from the Dong-in, the above non-party 1 died on April 18, 1931, and the above non-party 2 died on the ground of sale from Sep. 15, 1958. Thus, since the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the above non-party 2's lawful presumption of the registration of ownership transfer is broken and the burden of proof on whether the above non-party 2's registration of ownership transfer conforms to the substantive legal relationship is against the defendant, the above non-party 2 rejected the plaintiff's claim for the registration of this case, based on the presumption that the above non-party 1 purchased the forest of this case in accordance with the defendant's assertion.

However, in light of the purport of the provisions of the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Forest Ownership in the above non-party 2, registration of transfer of ownership under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Forest Ownership is presumed to be lawful. In order for the plaintiff to file a lawsuit for cancellation of the registration, the plaintiff must prove that the registration was not lawfully made under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration of Land Ownership due to any other reason (see Supreme Court Decisions 79Da971 delivered on July 24, 1979, 79Da971 delivered on December 11, 197, 79Da79Da973 delivered on December 11, 1979). Since the above false letter of guarantee or certificate of transfer of ownership under the Act on the Special Measures for the Registration of Land Ownership is not true, and it is permitted that the above non-party 2 purchaser was directly transferred from the registered titleholder, and it is not sufficient to prove that the registration was made through a third party after the death of the deceased non-party 1, the registered titleholder 2.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below on the premise that the defendant bears the burden of proving whether the registration of the forest land of this case conforms to the substantive relation is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the presumption of legitimacy and burden of proof under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Forest Land Ownership, and this constitutes a ground to reverse the judgment below. Thus,

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court, which is the court below, for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)