The exercise of the exercise of the right to cancel the registration of a clan in case where the registration of nullity of the cause for the real estate held by the clan member has been passed.

Where the registration of transfer of ownership invalidation for the real estate owned by a clan under title trust to a clan member has passed through a third party, the clan may exercise in subrogation the right to claim the cancellation of the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership held by the trustee.

Article 404 of the Civil Act

Jeon-ju Pak-gu Sympha

Linyl-style et al.

64Na411 delivered on July 2, 1965, the Jeonju District Court Decision 64Na411 delivered on July 2, 1965

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

After recognizing the fact that the plaintiff's request for cancellation of ownership transfer registration of the forest of this case was made with respect to each of the above forest of this case as the reason for rejecting the plaintiff's request, the court below held that since 49 years ago, the plaintiff's 1,738 forest of this case had been entrusted to the non-party 1 with respect to the same forest of this case under the name of the non-party 1 among the plaintiff's clans who had the plaintiff's graves for the 11st clan, and that the preservation registration was made under the name of the non-party 1 with respect to the non-party 1's forest of this case, and since the plaintiff's registration of ownership transfer was made under the name of the maximum spathic of the clan which was the cause of the plaintiff's clan's clan, the plaintiff's 1,738 forest of this case should be cancelled without the plaintiff's right to the above plaintiff's trust of this case, the plaintiff's property of this case should be cancelled without the plaintiff's claim that the above plaintiff's ownership should belong to the above non-party 1's forest of this case.

However, even though the plaintiff clan could not oppose the ownership of the forest land in this case for the same reasons as the plaintiff clans, it is clear that the plaintiff clan has a claim under the trust contract against the trustee under the trust contract at the time of the original sale of the forest land, and the trustee can exercise the right to claim the cancellation of the registration of ownership transfer due to the invalidation of the cause of the original sale of the forest land in this case by subrogation of the trustee under the trust contract at the time of original sale without cancelling the trust contract at the time of original sale. Thus, the court below's decision that the plaintiff clan cannot seek the cancellation of the registration by subrogation of the trustee under the trust contract at the time of original sale without cancelling the trust contract at the time of original sale is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the right of subrogation of the creditor, which affected the conclusion of the original judgment. Accordingly, the decision of the court below is just and correct, and it is remanded to the Jeonju District Court for a new trial of the case, and it is so decided as per

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-kim Kim-bun and Magman