[토지소유권이전등기말소등기][집36(2)민,86;공1988.9.15.(832),1211]
The effect of compromise in the case where the conditions are fulfilled in a compromise on condition of invalidation, and the time when a claim for invalidation is made.
When a settlement in court is established, it shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, so it shall be possible only by a lawsuit for retrial to cancel or change it. However, since the contents of a settlement in court may be freely determined by the agreement of the parties, if there is an objection against a specific third party as a settlement clause itself, if a settlement in court has been established with the content that the effect of the settlement will be null and void, as a matter of course, by the fulfillment of the conditions, the effect of the settlement shall be null
Article 206 of the Civil Procedure Act
Supreme Court Decision 70Da2535 Delivered on January 26, 1971
[Judgment of the court below]
Attorney Lee Sung-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Gwangju High Court Decision 87Na594 delivered on December 24, 1987
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
As to the Grounds of Appeal:
(1) If a settlement in the court is established, it shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, so it shall be possible only by a lawsuit for retrial in order to change it. However, since a settlement in the court may be freely determined in accordance with the agreement of the parties, if a settlement in the court has an objection to a specific third party as a settlement clause itself, if a settlement in the court has been established in order to invalidate the validity of a settlement in the court, it shall be naturally null and void due to the fulfillment of the conditions, and its validity shall be asserted at any time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 64Da1514, Mar. 2, 1965; 70Da2535, Jan. 26, 1971).
The court below's decision that the defendant's registration of transfer of ownership in the name of non-party 1 and the registration of this case in the name of the defendant, which was made based on the above protocol of settlement, shall be deemed null and void if the plaintiff raises an objection against the plaintiff, who is the real owner of the land for the purpose of the lawsuit, with respect to the case of demanding the performance of the principal registration procedure, which was established on September 16, 197 with respect to the case of the execution of the principal registration procedure between the non-party 1 and the green-dong agricultural cooperative, which was based on provisional registration No. 77Gahap152 of the Gwangju District Court, shall be deemed null and void, and the plaintiff's lawsuit in this case shall be deemed null and void in the event of the plaintiff's objection, which is the real owner of the land for the purpose of the lawsuit.
(2) Since it is apparent that the grounds for filing an application for resumption of argument by the defendant attorney, which was filed after the closure of argument in the lower court, were not the same as the theory of lawsuit, the lower court’s rejection of the application for resumption of argument cannot be deemed as an unlawful ground for lack of sufficient deliberation
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)