Whether a person who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the person registered as the owner on the register of land secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay may request the partnership for a change in his/her name (negative)

The register of land-building associations is basically prepared and kept by the land-building associations for the convenience of the execution of their projects or for the management of the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay. Since land-building associations register the names of the owners on the register of the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for the procedure or method that they set, a final and conclusive judgment ordering the owners on the register of the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense to make a statement of the intention to implement the procedure for change of names on the register of the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for the land, and a person who has received a final and conclusive judgment ordering the owners on the register of the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for the land-building association to make a request for change of names on the register of the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for development recompense

Articles 54 and 57 (4) of the Land Readjustment Project Act

Attorney Park Jae-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Sungan District Land Partitioning Association (Attorney Cho Yong-jin, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The number of users and three others

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff, including the costs incurred by the supplementary participation.

The judgment of the defendant ordering the plaintiff to implement the procedure to change the name of the owner on the ledger of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay, in the name of the plaintiff, from the name of the non-party Dae Jin Construction Co., Ltd. as to each real estate listed in the attached list to the name of the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the whole purport of the pleading in the statements in Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 3, 2-2, 3, 3-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-1, 2-2, and 85, and there is no counter-proof.

A. On March 10, 1990, the non-party company (the non-party company) entered into an agreement with the defendant union, which is the implementer of the Seongbuk-gu Sungdong and Postal Dong area, for consultation on the execution method of the project of this case from around 1989 to the defendant union, which is the implementer of the land readjustment project of this case, and for the supply and demand of the facility construction of the project of this case from the defendant union to the land development recompense for the project of this case.

B. Therefore, on June 21, 1993, the non-party company, which performed the above construction, filed a claim for approval of the first time of the construction with the defendant association, and received from the defendant association each of the real estate in the attached Form (hereinafter the real estate in this case), which belongs to the development recompense land for the project in this case, as the construction cost for the first time, and at present, the non-party company registered the real estate in this case as its owner on the ledger of the development recompense land of the defendant association.

C. On November 7, 1989, the Plaintiff purchased shares of 1,000 square meters or 1,000 square meters from the non-party company of this case from the non-party company of this case, and filed a lawsuit against the non-party company of this case against the non-party company of 3,300,000 square meters or more from the real estate of this case, to implement the procedure to change the name of the owner on the land development recompense in the name of the plaintiff as to the 3,305.8/53,073 shares from the real estate of this case (the Busan District Court Decision 93Na6443 delivered on May 26, 1994, Busan High Court 94Na6154 delivered on August 10, 195).

D. Based on the above final judgment, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant Union to change the name on the register of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay from the non-party company to the Plaintiff. However, the Defendant Union rejected the Defendant Union’s request on the ground that the creditors of the non-party company, including the Defendant’s supplementary intervenors, have the right to claim the transfer of ownership of the instant real estate

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Although the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is unclear, it seems to be clear that the Plaintiff sought the alteration of the name on the register of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay, and the Plaintiff’s assertion against the non-party company registered as the owner of the instant real estate on the ledger of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay of the Defendant Union, which ordered the non-party company registered as the owner of the instant real estate, to make a statement to implement the alteration of the Plaintiff’s name in the name of the Plaintiff’s future, and accordingly, sought to change the name on the register of

B. The register of land subdivisions is basically prepared and kept by the land subdivisions association for the convenience of the execution of the project or for the management of the land scheduled for the recompense of development outlay, and the land subdivisions association merely registers or changes the name of the owner on the register of the land secured for the recompense of development outlay in accordance with the procedure or method set by it. Thus, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have a ground or right to compel the defendant association to directly implement the change of name on the register of land secured for the recompense of development recompense of development outlay, and thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case cannot be accepted, even if the defendant association refused to demand the non-party company to seek the change of name on the register of land secured for the recompense of development recompense of development outlay in accordance with the above final judgment

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Lee Jong-young (Presiding Judge)