Presumption of registration made under the Act on Special Measures for Registration of Ownership Transfer and the Act on Special Measures for Registration of Ownership Transfer;

Where registration of preservation or transfer has been made under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Ownership of Forest Land or under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Ownership of Real Estate, the person in charge of the assessment of the land shall prove that the registration is not made lawfully due to the existence of another person, regardless of the existence of another person, and even if the registration is entered in the name of another person prior to the registration titleholder in the forestry book or land cadastre, the above preservation registration or transfer registration is made in accordance with the lawful procedures prescribed by the same Act and is presumed to be in conformity with the substantive

Article 10 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership of Forest Land; Article 7 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate; Article 10 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate; Article 186 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2928 Decided October 13, 1987

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

Defendant 1 and two others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-at-law

Suwon District Court Decision 86Na607 delivered on January 22, 1988

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Where registration of preservation or transfer has been made under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Ownership of Forest Land or under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Transfer of Ownership of Real Estate, even if there is a separate person affected by the situation of the land, such registration of preservation or transfer is registered in the name of another person prior to the registration titleholder in the forestry register or land cadastre, and is presumed to have been made in accordance with the lawful procedures prescribed by the same Act, and thus, a person who seeks cancellation of the registration is presumed to have been made in accordance with the substantive relations, and thus, he/she should prove that the registration was not made lawfully due to the existence of a false or forged certificate or confirmation certificate issued under the same Act, or any other reason (see

In the same purport, the court below rejected the plaintiffs' claim on the ground that there is no evidence to find that the letter of guarantee or confirmation attached to the registration of preservation or transfer of the non-party 1's ownership in the real estate of this case was false or forged, or that it was not legally registered due to other reasons. In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles, the violation of the rules of evidence, or the incomplete deliberation as pointed out.

However, the court below determined that the presumption power of the registration of this case was broken on the ground that the registration was originally recorded in the name of Nonparty 2 in the land cadastre of this case, because the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption power of registration under the above law, but judged that the registration is in accord with the substantive relationship, the above misunderstanding of legal principles cannot affect the conclusion of the judgment. All of the arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)