Estimated history and destruction of registration of preservation of ownership under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Forest Ownership;

Although the authority to estimate the registration under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Forest Ownership is recognized, if the person who registered the preservation claims that the ownership was transferred by the owner of the transfer of the preservation registration, and the former owner denies the transfer to the person who registered the preservation registration, the presumption power that can be presumed to be owned by the person who registered the preservation registration has broken down.

Articles 1, 4, and 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Forest Ownership; Article 186 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 73Da1658 delivered on February 26, 1974, 80Da748 delivered on May 27, 1980, 80Da1043 Delivered on November 23, 1982, 82Da605 Delivered on February 22, 1983, 83Da19 Delivered on March 22, 1983

Plaintiff 1 and 3 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant Kim flood

Defendant 1 and 30 Defendants, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 81Na2618 decided March 26, 1982

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 by the Plaintiffs are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, it is difficult to reverse the above defendant 1's above-mentioned land's right to be registered in the above-mentioned land list No. 13 and No. 67, each of the above-mentioned land's new forest land's ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant 1 and the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 2 for the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 1 and its new registration No. 2 for the above-mentioned land's new ownership transfer registration No. 3, and each of the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 1 and the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 1 were recorded in the separate list No. 3, which is non-party 1 and the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 2, which is the owner of the above-mentioned forest land's new registration No. 3, and the plaintiffs were recorded in the separate list No. 1 to 10, each of the above-mentioned land's new registration No. 2, as stated in the above list No. 1,

However, although the court below recognized the presumption power of registration under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of General Farmland and the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership of Forest Land. However, since the title holder claims that he was transferred ownership from the owner prior to the registration of preservation and the former owner denies the transfer of ownership to the title holder, the presumption power which can be presumed to be owned by the title holder due to the registration of preservation is broken (see Supreme Court Decision 73Da1658 delivered on February 26, 1974; Supreme Court Decision 80Da748 delivered on May 27, 1980, each of the above Decisions 80Da748 delivered on May 27, 1980), the court below should have determined that the above non-party 1, 2, 3, and 4, which were the land prior to the division of each land listed in the above attached list, were not in conformity with the legal principles on the sale or purchase of the above land under the title of the above 10-party co-owner or the above defendant 10-party 1.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court, which is the court below, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)