If the seller of real estate, who is liable to cooperate in the registration of the buyer, has the third party registered the establishment of a mortgage, the breach of trust is committed.

In the sale of real estate, the duties of the seller, who is responsible for registration, are to complete the disposal of his own property on his own face, at the same time, does not complete the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the buyer without the cooperation of the seller who is responsible for registration. Therefore, in light of the fact that the seller's duty to cooperate in the registration is mainly borne by the buyer who is the person responsible for registration, the seller of real estate is in a position to deal with another person's business under the Criminal Act, and thus, if the seller allows the third party to complete the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate sold in violation

Defendant

Attorney Seo-soo

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 74No2160 delivered on July 5, 1974

The appeal is dismissed.

As to the grounds of appeal by defense counsel

According to the facts established by the original judgment and the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant decided to sell the land of this case to the 5,500,500 won in the price of the main land to the gate of the public prosecution and received 1,500,000 won in the intermediate payment at 300,000 won in the intermediate payment at 2 times, and issued the cancellation notification to the Kim Heavy who acquired the status of the above mar on the ground of the delay in payment of the remaining price.

Despite the Supreme Court Decision on November 4, 1971 that the above contract was not rescinded on September 28, 1971, the defendant had registered the establishment of the mortgage No. 7,600,000 won and the 3,000,000 won with the maximum amount of the 7,60,000 won and the 2nd mortgage No. 3,00 won with the 7,000 won and the 3,00,000 won with the 7,60,000 won and the 3,00,000 won with the 1st mortgage and the 3,00,000 won and the 3,00,000 won with the 7,00,000 won and the 3,00,000 won with the 3,00,000 won and the 3,00,000 won and the 1,000 won.

All arguments are groundless.

Therefore, according to Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kang Jin-hee (Presiding Justice)