The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the ownership transfer registration under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (hereinafter “Special Measures Act”) is presumed to be a registration consistent with the substantive legal relationship, but the registration of ownership transfer is also based on the succession of ownership from the former registered titleholder and guarantee or confirmation of the fact of succession acquisition. Therefore, if the former registered titleholder is an unentitled person, and the registration of ownership transfer is to be cancelled as the cause of invalidation, the presumption of registration is reversed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 90Meu16723, Nov. 9, 199; 2013Da44171, Sept. 12, 2013). In the same purport, the presumption of registration of ownership transfer registration is presumed to be appropriate for the substantive relationship of the registered titleholder, and thus, if a person other than the registered titleholder is found to have been subject to assessment of the relevant land, it is more specific that the registered titleholder is subject to assessment.

As long as the fact of acquisition by succession is not proved, the registration is null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Da42852, Sept. 22, 1992; 2002Da43417, May 26, 2005). Thus, the transfer of ownership, which is completed based on the registration of ownership preservation, is null and void even if it is registered under the Act on Special Measures.

After comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, the court below acknowledged the facts as stated in its reasoning. Since the part of the land dispute on this case and the land No. 5 of this case in the judgment of the court below are proved to have been affected by the circumstances of the Plaintiff, the presumption of registration of preservation of ownership on each of the above land of AL, the Defendant's attachment, was broken, and there is no evidence to recognize that AL acquired by succession from the net or its successors, the above registration of preservation of ownership is null and void.